p. 119 | Review and Herald, Vol. 35, No. 15. (3/29/1870)

Giving Up.

With astonishment we have watched the course of some who once counted themselves, and who perhaps still count themselves, Adventists, as we have seen them surrender point after point of the clearest doctrines of the Advent faith. We note these instances, not with the idea of benefiting the individuals themselves, for we presume they are past help, but as a warning to others to beware how they give themselves up to doubting and darkness. The Pharisees of old, rather than admit the truth, attributed the works of Christ wrought through the Holy Spirit, to the direct agency of the devil, and thus committed the sin against the Holy Ghost. So if now a person in order to avoid the truth, perverts plain declarations of Scripture, and ignores the plainest principles of interpretation, in what condition does he place himself? In darkness and blindness of mind. He offers himself a voluntary victim to strong delusions, and to be led by the devil to whatever conclusions he may will. And what can a blind man see? And how much does a blind man know of the direction in which he is going? Beware, friends, how you yield a point of truth, in order to avoid what may seem to you like a heavy cross, sacrifice, or trial. Once entered upon that course, you know not where you will be led.

A company of Adventists have been willing to follow on in the advancing light of truth, and accept events in their chronological order. They now find themselves standing together, with their feet planted upon the commandments of God, proclaiming the third message, and waiting for the appearance of the Son of Man on the white cloud. Other Adventists, rejecting this later and logical development of the great movement, have thus departed from the light, and fallen more or less into bewilderment and confusion. We should sooner look in any other direction for light than in this. We are prepared for anything, however illogical or unscriptural, from some of them. They give themselves to explaining away direct statements of Scripture, and that, too, on principles which, if correct, unsettle every Bible doctrine that was ever promulgated.

Thus, a writer in the Herald of Life, of March 9, 1870, comes out with an article, undertaking to prove that this earth is not reserved unto fire, that the tares are not to be burned up literally, and that there is to be no manifestation of devouring flame in connection with the second appearing of our Lord; and finally, that there cannot be any general destruction of all living things, as is declared will take place at the end of this world, because God told Noah that he would not again smite every living thing as he had done.

What shall we think of such declarations from such a source? To ask what confidence we could have in them would be too lenient a form of expression. What respect can we have for them? Again we say, Beware of making the first departure from the plain principles of truth, lest like darkness come upon you.

That the writer was laboring under a state of utter blindness is evident from the studiousness with which he avoids those declarations of Scripture which expressly contradict his statements, and the means to which he resorts to explain away those to which he has the courage to allude.

Thus the day of the Lord “that shall burn as an oven,” the fire into which the tares are to be cast, the lake of fire in which there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth, are all, says this writer, “consistent with protracted distresses, vexation, disappointment, despair, and death.” On the same principle of interpretation anything can be proved, or rather nothing; for when we come to the conclusion that the Bible does not mean what it says, it might just as well be laid aside. But such declarations as Isa. 66:15, that the Lord shall come with fire, that he shall render his rebuke with flames of fire, and with fire and his sword plead with all flesh; and 2 Thess. 1:8, that the Lord Jesus shall be revealed in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God; and 2 Pet. 3:7, that the heavens and earth which are now, are reserved unto fire, as the antediluvian world was to water, this to be destroyed as literally by fire as that was by water,—all these he passes by with studious silence.

The Lord save his people from drifting into that deplorable state of darkness and unbelief in which they will endeavor to bend the Scriptures to their own views, and shut their eyes to all which they cannot pervert.

The Providence of God.

By John Nevins Andrews

We read with the deepest interest the record of the wonderful providences of God, contained in the Bible. Perhaps no one of these seems more worthy of our admiration, than the case of Mordecai and Haman, contained in the book of Esther. The hand of God was directly concerned in the advancement of Esther to the throne of Persia. And by this remarkable event, he saved the Jews from a general massacre. No one can doubt that the providence of God made Esther queen for this very purpose. But there is one fact stated that shows how high above human agency God is exalted. The question ever arises, Suppose the agent to whom Providence commits a certain work should prove unfaithful to that work, what, then, would the Almighty do? Even suppose Esther had proved untrue, what then?

The words of Mordecai, meet this very point; Est. 4:14: “For if thou altogether holdest thy peace at this time, then shall there enlargement and deliverance arise to the Jews from another place; but thou and thy father’s house shall be destroyed: and who

knoweth, whether thou art come to the kingdom for such a time as this?”

Here we have a most striking truth revealed. The providence of God is prepared for the emergency. It can never be taken by surprise. If Esther were to forget God, and fail in her duty, deliverance would arise from another place. If she in her exaltation left her work undone, God would employ perhaps one of the most lowly. His work would not fail. Let us remember this. We may ruin ourselves by disobedience, and may cause others to stumble, but we shall find that God is not dependent upon us. J. N. A.

God's Word vs. Dreams.

By H. Pratt

The following dream was published some months since in the World's Crisis. The person who had the dream, Bro. Bahler, has since joyfully received the truth respecting the entire law of God. He says, “I have since become a commandment-keeper, and find much peace, joy, and comfort, in living out the law of God. I do not find the commandments grievous, but a delight, and I thank God for having led me into his marvelous light.” He therefore wishes the matter published in the REVIEW, to counteract as far as possible the evil of its appearance in the Crisis, remarking very truly that dreams are less to be relied upon than the word of God. When Eld. Pratt wrote, “It is the Lord’s doings,” the wish was evidently father to the thought. The following is his narration of the matter:

“In visiting among the brethren, I called as usual, upon a family who are much interested in the Sabbath question, especially the wife. We always talk freely upon the law and gospel with kindness. A blind brother sitting by, who has become a strong believer and an efficient laborer in the Advent cause, who had been boarding some months in this, and another family who keep the seventh day, listened with much attention. When we were through he says:

“‘I want to tell my dream, if you will hear it.’

“‘Very well,’ said I, ‘he that hath a dream let him tell a dream.’

“He says, ‘After hearing much upon the Sabbath, my mind became unsettled. I prayed the Lord to show me the truth. I said, Lord, you know I am blind, and can’t read, so do, Lord, show me the truth about the Sabbath. I prayed three weeks [just as long as Daniel prayed] before I got an answer. When I got an answer it was in a dream, which has settled my mind forever. I dreamed that I had been into the city, and returning home, came down Broadway [a street on which he lived], till I reached the gate leading up to the house. I saw in the path right before me the two covenants—the new and old. I saw a line between them. The new covenant was next to me, the old was on the other side of the line. I was about to step over the line, when I heard a voice, saying, “Stop! if you step over that line you will get entangled.’

“‘I turned aside and came up to the house. I awoke from sleep, and have had no more trouble about the Sabbath.’

“It seems to me that no one could have listened to that simple narrative from that poor blind and godly brother, without exclaiming, ‘It is the Lord’s doings, blessed be his holy name.’ H. PRATT.”

Resuming the Editorial Duties

By Uriah Smith

By the action of the Publishing Association, at its last session, the duties of editor have been again assigned to me. Although it has not been customary for such action to take effect till three weeks after the election, yet, on account of the worn condition of Bro. Andrews, owing to the incessant labor and taxation to which he has been subjected the past winter, the Trustees wish me to enter at once upon my duties. I therefore with this number, again assume the editorial responsibility of the Review. Grateful for the year's release which I have enjoyed from the confinement and cares of the Office, I should have preferred, if I had consulted my own feelings, a continuance of this freedom. But I wish to labor wherever the little service that I can render, may be most acceptable; and as my brethren have again assigned me to this place, I have only to say that I return to these duties cheerfully, and with an increased interest in the work of the last warning message, and an enlarged view of its magnitude and importance. I feel, in a measure at least, the responsibilities that are laid upon me; and I know that I shall not be able adequately to meet them, without especially receiving divine assistance. For this I shall seek; and to this end, I solicit the prayers of believers everywhere, for the prosperity of the Review, this important organ of the work, in which all lovers of the truth have a common interest. U. SMITH.

The Pittsburg Convention and Organic Religion.

[We call attention to the following valuable article from the N. Y. Independent, of March 17, 1870. It is a candid review of the movement now in progress for the virtual union of church and state. J. N. A.]

The fathers who framed the Constitution of the United States, wisely dissevered it, and the government created by it, from all organic connection with the religion of the people. They contented themselves with simply declaring that “Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” and that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” The melancholy history of the past had instructed them, as it ought to instruct all, that the absolute severance of the state from all organic connection with religion, is the only ground of safety to the civil and religious liberty of the people. Though not atheists, they had the wisdom to frame a government whose fundamental law left religion to the inalienable rights of the individual conscience, and made all religious prescription or persecution constitutionally impossible.

The resolutions of the late Pittsburg Convention proceed upon a very different theory in the construction of civil government. We ask the attention of our readers to the fourth one of the series: “Resolved, That, in order to maintain and give permanency to the Christian features which have marked this nation from its origin, it is necessary to give them authoritative sanction in our organic law.” This more than surprises us. Do the members of this convention really mean what they say? Does Judge Strong, of Pennsylvania, design to place himself on this ground? Or was the resolution hastily adopted, without due reflection? If we understand the import of their words, these gentlemen propose that Christianity shall be authoritatively incorporated into the “organic law” of this country; and this is just the principle of all the religious despotisms which have cursed mankind and corrupted religion in centuries past. It is in kind the very doctrine adopted by the Pope of Rome and all his cardinals. These “Christian features,” referred to by the convention, are simply the religious beliefs and practices of that portion of the American people known as Christians. They can be nothing else. They certainly are not the “features” of infidels or Jews. Now, observe that these beliefs and practices are, according to the theory of the convention, to be maintained and made permanent. In what way? Not by preaching Christianity as Christ and the apostles did; not by the circulation of tracts, and the distribution of the Bible among the people; not by the influence of holy lives and individual conversions to the truth; but by giving “them authoritative sanction in our organic law.” This means, if it means anything, that Christianity, as somebody understands it, is to be incorporated into the structure of the National Government and become an integral part of the Constitution. An “authoritative sanction in our organic law” can mean nothing less.

Now, we take the liberty of saying, that no such method, as the one proposed, is at all necessary, “to maintain and give permanency to the Christian features which have marked this nation from its origin.” Ever since the organization of this government, now nearly one hundred years ago, Christianity has lived and prospered in this country without “any authoritative sanction in our organic law;” and we see no reason for supposing that it cannot continue to do so for all time. It asks no such service at the hands of the state; and, moreover, the history of all such experiments shows that the state cannot extend the service without doing more harm than good. We hence believe that in this respect the framers of the Constitution were much wiser than the members of the recent Pittsburg Convention. The thing is just right as it is—right for the government, right for religion, and right for the free and untrammeled exercise of human liberty; and, as we have no doubt, the large majority of the American people are of the opinion that it is best to keep it right. We are in favor of reforms; but not those that go backward, and lead toward the despotisms of the dark ages. The doctrine of these gentlemen is impracticable in this country, and wholly undesired, even if it were practicable; and we hence advise them to apply their efforts and resources to some more legitimate object. The proposition itself, upon its very face, supplies its own answer when presented to the American mind. We are opposed to the whole idea from beginning to end, in every possible form and stage of its application.

The Seventh Day Regarded by the Ancient Heathens.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

THE following may be interesting to Sabbath-keepers, as confirming the fact that the seventh day was set apart and kept from the beginning. It is from Leland’s “Advantage and Necessity of the Christian Revelation,” vol. 1, chap. 2, p. 72. He says:

“Some learned persons have added, that the seventh day seems for a long time to have been distinguished among the nations, and to have had a peculiar sacredness ascribed to it. Mr. Selden indeed has taken great pains to show that the seventh day mentioned by pagan writers, is to be understood of the seventh day of the month; and that there is no proof of the religious observance of the seventh day of the week among the ancient Gentiles. Yet it is plain, from that very learned writer’s own accounts, that there was a particular regard paid by them to the number seven, and that the numbering of days by weeks, consisting of seven days, was of great antiquity, especially among the Eastern nations. And I think a more probable account cannot be given of it, than that it was originally derived from a tradition of the history of the creation, and of a seventh day set apart by divine appointment, in commemoration of it; though, like other traditions, it came in process of time to be neglected, and the true original design of it lost and forgotten.”

D. M. Canright.

Battle Creek, Mich., March 22, 1870.

The Closing Messages

By R. F. COTRELL

The Closing Messages.—No. 26.

WE come to consider the worship and mark of the beast. That power is worshiped to which we give the supremacy, and which we honor by our obedience. If the Papacy has changed the commandments of God, and corrupted the ordinances of the gospel, willingly and knowingly to accept its substitutes instead of what God requires in his word, is to make the beast supreme, acknowledging in our practice his right to exalt himself “above all that is called God.” If that blasphemous power has virtually expunged the second commandment from the decalogue, to admit of bowing down to images, changed the Sabbath of the fourth, divided the tenth into two, one of which, thus separated, would be but a repetition of the seventh, taken away the Lord’s supper, and put in its place the mummeries of the so-called “sacrifice of the mass,” and substituting sprinkling for baptism, and unconscious babes as the subjects, instead of believers in Christ, to follow it in all or any of these, willingly and knowingly, is to bow to the power of apostasy and worship the anti-christian beast, instead of the living and true God.

The worship and mark of the beast are contrasted, in the message, with the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. This shows that they are directly opposed to each other, and thus gives us the clue to the interpretation. Those who really keep the commandments and the faith, will not worship the beast nor have his mark. To follow the beast in any of his corruptions of the law or the gospel, constitutes a part of his worship; but the mark of the beast, as we will show, is something opposed to the Father’s law.

Mark, sign, and seal, signify the same thing, and are used interchangeably in the Scriptures. In Rom. 4:11, circumcision is called both a sign and a seal; and in the Old Testament it is called a token of the covenant. Rev. 7:2, 3, where the servants of God are said to be sealed with the seal of God in their foreheads, has been rendered by some translators, signed with the sign of God; and in Rev. 9, where the same, or a similar, work is done for the people of God, a mark is said to be marked upon their foreheads, and this is the token which saves them from the great slaughter that follows.

The great day of wrath immediately follows the close of probation; and just before that day of wrath two classes, the servants of God and the servants of the beast, are represented, in symbolic language, as being marked or sealed. In Rev. 7, the sealing of the servants of God is described. It is one of the events to transpire under the opening of the sixth seal, introduced in chap. 6:12. This seal covers a period of time beginning with the signs of the second advent, and reaching to the time when it shall be said, “The great day of his wrath is come.” But before the day of mercy closes and the day of wrath comes, the winds of war and strife are held, that the servants of God may be sealed. The closing work of their probation is the sealing, signing, or marking of the 144,000, and the consequence is, they are shielded from the wrath of God, and delivered from the persecuting power of the image of the beast, and stand with the Lamb upon Mount Zion, having “his Father’s name written in their foreheads.” See Rev. 13:15–18; 14:1–5. Now it is at this very time, namely, while the wrath of God is pending, that the last message of probation warns all not to receive the mark of the beast. Rev. 14:9–12. They cannot have both marks; for they are opposites. They must choose which mark they will

have. Consequently the third angel’s is the sealing message, and contains in it the seal of God. And since the seal of God writes the Lamb’s FATHER’S name in the forehead, the seal must be found in the commandments of the Father, and not in the faith of the Son. The mark of the beast is directly opposed to something contained in the commandments of God.

The mark, sign, or seal, of God, is his name written in the forehead; chap. 14:1; and the mark of the beast also is the “mark of his name.” Verse 11. Name, by a figure, signifies authority; as, in the name of a king, means, by the king’s authority. Authority is represented by law. And as the authority of God is represented by his law, so the authority of the beast must be represented by his law; and since, as we have shown, the beast has thought himself able to change the law of God, we shall find the mark of his power and authority in his revised edition of that law.

What portion of the law of God is the sign of his power and authority? What is there in the law of ten commandment which proves the right of their Author to make laws for men and demand their obedience? What is there here to distinguish the one living and true God from all false gods—“the gods that have not made the heavens and the earth”? Nothing whatever, except what we find in the fourth commandment, the Sabbath law. Read them all carefully and you will find that this is so.

This commandment alone vindicates his authority and right as a supreme lawgiver. He is the MAKER of all things; therefore, he has a right to challenge our obedience. The Sabbath is the given memorial that he made the heavens and the earth; therefore, it is the sign, mark, seal, or token, of his power and authority, and of his right to demand obedience of the entire universe which he created.

This, all must see, is reasonable; but this is not all; we have the word of God in attestation of its truth: “Verily my Sabbaths ye shall keep; it is a SIGN between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may KNOW THAT I AM THE LORD that doth sanctify you.” “It is a SIGN between me and the children of Israel forever; for IN SIX DAYS THE LORD MADE HEAVEN AND EARTH, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed.” Ex. 31:13, 17. “Moreover, also I gave them my Sabbaths, TO BE A SIGN between me and them, THAT THEY MIGHT KNOW THAT I AM THE LORD that sanctify them.” “And hallow my Sabbaths; and they shall be a SIGN between me and you, that ye may know that I am the LORD your God.” Eze. 20:12, 20. In these texts it is four times asserted that the Sabbath is a sign between God and his people—a sign that he is the true God, the creator of all things, and that they know him and are sanctified by him. Now if the Sabbath has not been abolished, as antinomians declare, nor changed, as the Man of Sin holds, it still remains a sign, mark, or seal, to distinguish the true God, and also the people that know him and keep his commandments. Viewing it thus, and knowing that the changer of times and laws has perverted the way of God, rending the seal from his law, and thus leaving the people that would serve him, exposed to fall in the great “hour of temptation” that lies before them, for the want of this sign of the living God, we can see the propriety and importance of strong angels’ being commissioned to hold the winds and restrain the angry nations, till the prophetic commands shall be fulfilled. “Bind up the testimony; seal the law among my disciples.” Isa. 8:16. It is no wonder, viewed in the light of prophecy, that the Sabbath question is now being specially agitated. God has commanded his servants to be sealed before the hour of temptation and time of trouble, and has provided a special message to accomplish the work.

Having now found the seal of God in his commandments, it would be reasonable to infer, that the mark of the beast is something directly opposed to it—a rival Sabbath to supplant the Sabbath of the Lord. But since we have presented the testimony of the Lord himself concerning what he has given as the sign of his power and authority, we will permit the beast, who thinks himself able to change God’s law, to testify to his mark or sign of power and authority, on which thus far he bases his claim to make laws for men and demand their obedience. The “Douay Catechism,” a standard Roman Catholic work, speaks to this point as follows:

“Question. How prove you that the church hath power to command feasts and holy days? “Answer. By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of; and, therefore, they fondly contradict themselves, by keeping Sunday strictly, and breaking most other feasts commanded by the same church. “Q. How prove you that? “A. Because by keeping Sunday they acknowledge the church’s power to ordain feasts, and to command them under sin.”

The following is from the “Doctrinal Catechism,” another Catholic work:

“Q. Have you any other way of proving that the church has power to institute festivals of precept? “A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her—she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday, the seventh day, a change for which there is no scriptural authority.”

Here is a claim of the very highest authority and power, a claim of the ability and right to set aside what God has commanded, and to create moral obligation, making that a duty which God has not commanded, and that a sin which he has not prohibited. And of this power the Sunday-sabbath, the rival of Jehovah’s Sabbath, is offered as the sign.

We have now plainly before us, God the creator, with his Sabbath as his sign, or mark, of power; and the beast, as a rival power, “sitting in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God,” with his rival, or counterfeit, Sabbath as the sign of his power. Which will we have? Whose seal will we accept?

R. F. COTRELL.

This foregoing article should have appeared in REVIEW, No. 11, but was overlooked.—Ed.

J. N. A

By John Nevins Andrews

Prayer.

The efficacy of prayer is not because of its power to change the mind of the Most High, but because of its effect upon the petitioner, in preparing him to receive. When we pray for things suitable to our real wants, it requires no statement of our urgent necessities to cause the Lord to incline toward our supplication. He desires to bestow such blessings upon us. The object of prayer is not, by any means, to create such a purpose in the mind of the Lord. The truth is, the hinderance is not on the Lord's part at all. The difficulty lies in ourselves. Prayer, humiliation, self-abasement, wrestling, agonizing, are all in place, all a part of the divine plan. Let no one suppose that these are undervalued, or that we may, by any means, dispense with them. No, by no means. But where lies the hinderance? It is wholly in ourselves. The object of the deep self-abasement is to prepare ourselves to receive the blessings of God. Nothing is more certain than that when signal deliverance is needed, that deliverance has to be delayed because the people of God cannot bear it. Were it to be granted they would be lifted up to their own ruin. So the Lord suffers them to be brought into a great strait that they may, by the deepest humiliation and self-abasement, become prepared to bear the signal deliverance which he earnestly desired to grant. The earnest prayer and deep prostration of the soul before God, are not for the purpose of extorting favor from One who is really averse to granting it, and has to be worn out by importunity, and induced to do that which he was at heart unwilling to do. By no means. The delay is only that we may be brought into the place which God can approve, and where he can in safety to ourselves grant us his favor in the blessings which we ask. The hinderance is always with ourselves. The first question to be determined in prayer is, whether the petition is a proper one to present before the Lord. Then we must seek to ascertain and put away from ourselves everything that stands in the way of that petition being granted. When this work is really accomplished the answer to prayer will be immediate.

J. N. A

Report from Bro. Hutchins.

By A. S. HUTCHINS

AGREEABLE to appointment, I met with the brethren in Roxbury, at the house of Bro. E. P. Cram, the first Sabbath in February. It was a pleasure to see the scattered brethren and sisters, from this section, so generally present, also to meet Bro. D. T. Evans and others, from Granville.

Some freedom was enjoyed both in speaking the truth, and trying persuade men to love God more fervently and serve him more devotedly. We could but regret that some seemed to realize no more the importance of the work in which we are engaged, the solemnity of the last saving message from Heaven to perishing men, and the value of the few lingering moments of probationary time. We held three meetings of religious worship. Bro. Evans aided in speaking the word.

On first-day, three from Granville were received into the church by vote. They give evidence of true love to God, and for his cause, and of having understandingly embraced the truth. May their walk with God be close, and their growth in grace be constant. S. B. was also renewed for the present year. In this the brethren seemed ready and prompt to do duty.

The next Sabbath I attended meeting at Granville at the house of Bro. Evans, where the brethren meet from Sabbath to Sabbath for worship. A few have embraced the Sabbath here since Bro. E.'s removal to this place, one year ago. Others are candidly examining and seeking for the truth.

By special request, I went to Bordoville on the 17th, where I remained till the 28th. In this time, more than twenty meetings were held. As others will speak more definitely of these meetings, and the signal success with which the labors of the servants of the Lord were crowned, I will only add, that I felt in all my heart to thank God for freedom, sweet, glorious freedom, as I left the place. And in my soul the same warm emotions of lively gratitude glow to-day. But we must be watchful and faithful to hold the victories thus far gained.

The last two Sabbaths I have spent with the brethren in Wolcott. Our numbers here are small, but we cherish the hope that there are a few here of whom it may yet be said, “And they shall walk with Me in white: for they are worthy.” A. S. HUTCHINS.

Wolcott, Vt., March 16, 1870.

Report from Bro. Rodman.

By P. C. Rodman

Our Monthly Meeting at Green Hill, R. I., was held Feb. 19 and 20. Owing to a heavy rain on the 18th, which continued until the morning of the 19th, but few were present; but our meetings commenced with some interest, which was more and more apparent as they progressed. Social meetings were interesting, nearly all taking part. A few held back and did not receive all the benefit they should themselves, and of course did not do all they could to make it interesting and profitable for others. If after we have done all, we are unprofitable servants, what must we be when we neglect to do the little we can do? Brethren, we need to awake and put on the armor of righteousness, which is no less than right-doing. In Jesus' name and strength do right then, brethren and sisters, in

meeting and out, at home and abroad, in acts, words, and thoughts. You, indulge in nothing that you are not sure is pleasing to God. Then his Spirit will rest upon you, and light will shine upon your pathway, even more and more until the perfect day.

We held eight meetings in all. I spoke five times with some freedom. At a subsequent meeting with the church, Bro. J. P. Green, who had been at variance with the rest of the church on some points, confessed he had been mistaken, and wished to be forgiven for his wrong steps in turning their Sabbath meeting into a discussion by taking extreme views, and pressing them upon the church. After some remarks the following resolution was adopted:

Resolved, That, as the church has been grieved by the extreme position and unwise course of Bro. J. P. Green, and as his influence has been in some degree thrown against them in public, he should as publicly confess his wrong and save the cause from further reproach, by seeking counsel of his brethren, especially the elder of the church, before advancing what he may think is new light, or leading off in any direction religiously.

The above was unanimously received by the church at Green Hill, R. I., March 7, 1870.

P. C. RODMAN.

Battle Creek, Mich., March 23, 1870.

Report from Bro. Butler.

By George I. Butler

SABBATH and Sunday, following the Lisbon meeting, I spent with the church at Laporte City. Quite a number were present from other places, and there was a good attendance of those living near, although the weather was inclement; and there seemed to be more generally a spirit of union prevailing than formerly, while some who have been alienated from us seemed more friendly. These were encouraging features. But I feel that there is much need of a deeper, more thorough heart-work in this church; a great need of a spirit of sacrifice, a giving up of the world, a deeper interest in the burden-bearing spirit. This church has manifested the least interest of any in the State, in raising means for the tent-enterprise and other burdens, in proportion to their property. Unless there is a reform in this respect, it is very evident God's blessing cannot rest upon them as upon others.

Wednesday evening following, I met with the few at Fayette. Some ten or twelve are keeping the Sabbath there now, and some others for whom we feel a deep interest. Those who came out originally all remain firm. Meetings commenced at Waukon, Sabbath evening, Feb. 26, and held every day for a week. Sabbath and Sunday, there was a good attendance from other places. I trust some permanent good was accomplished by our meetings. Several causes of trial and discouragement we hope were permanently removed. I expected to have further meetings with this church, but received an invitation to attend the preliminary meetings at Battle Creek, that were to precede the General Conference, and thus had to close prematurely.

March 5 and 6, met with the church at West Union. Our house of worship was crowded both days. Indeed we had the largest attendance I ever saw at West Union. The church have been encouraged of late by several becoming interested in the truth and keeping the Sabbath. Had it not been for lack of time and opportunity, there would have been a baptism in both places. Bro. Nason Hoyt, who has acted as leader in this church for several years, was elected and ordained elder. The liberality shown by the brethren in Waukon and West Union in subscribing on our tent and camp-meeting fund was very encouraging to me. Each church subscribed nearly ninety dollars, though they are generally poor in this world's goods, and times are very hard. I wish others would show more of the same spirit. It is the hardest year to raise money I have seen for a long time in Iowa, and for a time it seemed very doubtful if the fund necessary to get our tent top from the maker's hand, and for other necessary purposes, could be obtained. There is yet a necessity for our brethren in other parts of the State to take hold and help in this direction, if they wish to keep us from serious embarrassment. Money or subscription can be sent to R. M. Kilgore, Washington, Iowa, our State Conference treasurer.

GEO. I. BUTLER.

Letters on the Sabbath and Third Angel’s Message

BRO. J. ARMSTRONG writes from Cuyahoga Co., O.: I thank the dear friend who sent me the ADVENT REVIEW. Since reading it, I have made up my mind to keep the Lord's Sabbath, with the help of God. I am the only one in this section who observes the day. I have lent the paper to my neighbors. Some of them like it very much; but others are bitterly opposed. It is astonishing to me how people can be so prejudiced against the truth.

SR. O. K. DOLTON writes from Cook Co., Ill.: My heart has often been made to rejoice while reading the REVIEW, and to see that so many are enlisting under the banner of Jesus. I am one of the lone ones, living sixteen miles south of Chicago; but I am firm in the blessed hope of the third angel's message, and believe it to be the last message of mercy. I am trying, by the help of the Lord, to do his will and prepare to meet Jesus when he comes.

Meetings in Wisconsin.

By Isaac Sanborn

We have now held meetings here five weeks. We commenced in the Christian meeting-house, in Day Hollow; but as the Christian people got alarmed at the interest that was raised in a few days, they locked up the house. We then commenced meetings in Kickapoo Center, about four miles from the meeting-house. Bro. Downer preached there, while I staid and watched the movement of things in the meetings at the meeting-house held by the Christian people, which, however, soon closed for the want of interest. I then commenced holding meetings in an old log school-house, which continued five evenings, when a discussion was entered into between Eld. Babb, Disciple, and myself, which lasted five days, two sessions each day, of two hours each. This was held in the meeting-house. I affirmed that the Bible teaches that the seventh-day Sabbath was made at creation, and, by virtue of the fourth commandment of the decalogue, is binding on Jew and Gentile.

Eld. Babb affirmed that the Bible teaches that the first-day called Sunday, is the Lord's day, and that the Lord's people should keep it holy as a day of worship.

It is not necessary for me to say how the discussion ended. But many left the last session well satisfied that the seventh-day is the Sabbath of the Lord, and that Sunday has no higher authority than the Roman Catholic church.

The result of our labors here, as far as we know at present, is, that about thirty are keeping the Sabbath, and many are deeply convicted and almost persuaded to obey. We pray that they may remember that they are in the valley of decision, and that the day of the Lord is near; and therefore, they should speedily obey the Lord. We have organized the Sabbath-keepers here into a prayer and social meeting society, and appointed a leader, till we can return. We go from here to-morrow, to Sand Prairie, to spend Sabbath and first-day, March 19 and 20, and on the 22d, I expect to reach home, having been absent over five months, preaching the third angel's message. I trust my labor has done much good. About fifty have embraced the Sabbath, while more than one hundred more have been deeply convicted that it is the truth. We have given away about thirty dollars' worth of tracts, and sold about twenty-five dollars' worth. On account of the scarcity of money, we have not obtained many subscribers for the REVIEW, but we think times will be better next summer. Bro. Downer has rendered me much aid in these meetings. He will still continue with me. Pray for us, that the Lord may give us wisdom. ISAAC SANBORN.

Vernon Co., Wis., March 17, 1870.

To the Churches in Wisconsin.

By I. SANBORN

As the churches of Illinois are going to purchase a new tent for that State, and as I learn from Bro. Olds that there are only about $300, of pledges and money, in his hands for a tent in Wisconsin, and as it will take about $450.00 to buy a new tent, and as pledges are not money, we hope the brethren will reduce their pledges to money as fast as possible. Let the elders and leaders of the churches and companies of Sabbath-keepers in Wisconsin, see to this at once. Let brethren become responsible to some one in the church that can advance the money and wait a few weeks on the brethren. Work! work! brethren and sisters, while the day lasts; for soon the rich and their money will perish together.

Send money to Bro. C. W. Olds, Little Prairie, Walworth Co., Wis. I. SANBORN.

Continue reading: Note from Bro. Byington