Earlier text: General ArticlesDeath of Christ Vicarious.
By Editor
THAT which is done for another is vicarious. Death suffered for another is vicarious death; but in the preceding cases brought from the Scriptures, the sin offerings never were slain or offered for themselves, or for their own wrongs, but always for the sins of others. Their blood was shed in the stead of that of others; their deaths were truly vicarious. And if we take away from them all ideas of substitution or vicariousness, we take away the sole reason of their being slain, and all possibility of an atonement consistent with justice. It needs no more than a mere reference to the Scriptures to show the relation those transactions bore to the gospel of Christ, and that the death of Christ was in truth substitutionary and vicarious. "All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." Isa. 53:6. "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree." 1 Pet. 2:24. "So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many." Heb. 9:28. Thus he bore our sins—they were laid on him—he was made sin for us; standing in that relation to the law in our stead. And the wages of sin being death, because our sin was laid on him, "he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities." "For the transgression of my people was he stricken." "His soul" was made "an offering for sin." Isa. 53:5, 8, 10. He that doeth not all the words of the law is cursed; but Christ is made a curse for us to redeem us from the curse of the law. Deut. 27:26; Gal. 3:10-13. "Christ died for the ungodly." Rom. 5:6. "Was delivered for our offenses." Chap. 4:25. "Christ died for our sins." 1 Cor. 15:3. He died for all, for all were dead, or condemned to death, for all had sinned. 2 Cor. 5:14. He "suffered for sins, the just for the unjust." 1 Pet. 3:18. "Christ hath suffered for us." Chap. 4:1. In all these expressions the idea of substitution is prominent, as it was in the type. Again, the same truth is taught in all those scriptures which speak of Christ having purchased us. He gave "his life a ransom for many." Matt. 20:28. To ransom, says Webster, is to redeem from captivity by paying an equivalent. "Who gave himself a ransom for all." 1 Tim. 2:6. "Ye are not your own; for ye are bought with a price." 1 Cor. 6:19, 20; 7:23. "Denying the Lord that bought them." 2 Pet. 2:1. "Ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Christ." 1 Pet. 1:18, 19. "Hast redeemed us to God by thy blood." Rev. 5:9. "Which he hath purchased with his own blood." Acts 20:28. Now the sole idea of redeeming, purchasing, or buying, with a price, is that of substitution by equivalent, or receiving one instead of another. George Storrs, of New York, in a small work on the Atonement, rejected the idea of Christ dying in the stead of the sinner, and his views ought to be noticed, especially as he represented a class. He said the atonement must correspond to man's nature, and to the demand of the law, for "it is such a satisfaction as justice rightfully demands." The best satisfaction to law is obedience; an atonement is satisfaction rendered for disobedience. It is indeed such a satisfaction as justice demands. But it would be difficult for any one to explain why the Atonement must correspond to man's nature, and to the claim that justice has on man, if the death of the sinner be not substitutionary. How otherwise could it meet the claim? Again he said that "by dying, though death had no claim on him, justice was vindicated." Now if "death had no claim on him," how could justice be vindicated in his death? And is justice ever vindicated in the death of one on whom it has no claim? No; it is rather a perversion of justice. But all admit that death had no claim on Christ, so far as his own actions were concerned; therefore if justice was upheld or vindicated in his death, it was because he died "in the room and stead" of those on whom death had a claim. That there was a transfer of sin all will admit; our sins were laid on him. But death has a claim on the sinner, for the wages of sin is death. And if the sin was transferred, of course the claim of death must also have been transferred. So death had a claim on him; but only as he stood in our stead. He was made sin for us; therefore he was made a curse for us. 2 Cor. 5:21; Gal. 3:14. The idea of vicariousness, or complete substitution, is as plainly taught as language can teach it; and the wonder is that the question was ever raised by Bible-readers, or that the possibility of the negative being true was ever admitted. We must further notice the objection that if a complete substitute is accepted, justice is satisfied, and the release of the accused is of justice, not of mercy. Many respectable speakers and authors seem to have become strangely confused on this subject. The objection seems, at first glance, to have force; but it is really founded on a very partial and superficial view of the gospel plan. It is mercy to the criminal for the Government to accept a substitute; and mercy to him also for the substitute to offer or consent to stand in his stead. It is nothing but mercy, pardon, free gift, to the sinner, in every part of the transaction. And it would be so if he had himself procured a substitute; much more when the Governor provides the substitute, and this even the Son of his delight, and invites the sinner to return to his allegiance and obedience, that he may receive pardon and life through his blood. It has been noticed that justice and mercy must unite in order to both honor the Government and spare the sinner. Paul shows that they do unite in the gospel, for therein God can be just and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus. His justice is shown by maintaining the dignity and honor of his law, even at the expense of the life of his Son, his mercy is shown by justifying us through his blood. But inasmuch as Christ was not a sinner, it would be very difficult to show wherein God was just in the death of his Son, unless he died to meet the just desert of our sin in our stead. Burges on the Atonement, a work which reflects a somewhat popular view, says:— "If a man engage to perform a certain piece of work, for a reward which is proposed, it makes no difference whether he do the work himself, or procure another to do it for him. Let the work be done according to agreement, and he is entitled to the reward. So, if Christ has done for believers the work which the law required them to do, God is now bound, on the principle of strict justice, to bestow the promised reward, eternal life. There is no grace, but stern, unbending justice here." Pp. 202, 203. Barnes takes substantially the same view, and both aver that Christ did not suffer the penalty of the law, but something substituted for the penalty. Did this illustration merely go to show the insufficiency of Christ's obedience to moral law to make an atonement, without the suffering of death, there could be no objection raised against it. But it goes far beyond this. In order for an illustration to be worth anything, there must be some analogy between its main points and the thing illustrated. In this case there is none whatever. Man is a rebel, condemned to death; the law can only be satisfied with the taking of life. Now in regard to rendering satisfaction to a broken law there cannot possibly be anything existing between sinful man and his Creator, answering to the nature of a contract, as this illustration supposes. But its defect is most plainly seen in this, that man does not, and cannot, procure a substitute. If man by his own efforts had procured the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ, the Atonement would rest on an entirely different footing from what it now does. Any illustration based on such an utter impossibility, which is so contrary to evident truths, and to the whole revealed plan of the Atonement, cannot aid in a correct understanding of it. God has set forth his Son to be a propitiation,—to suffer death, the penalty of the law, for us; so that his substitutionary sacrifice is the gift of God, even as Christ himself was the gift of God. "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son." If we take for granted that the death of Christ meets every demand of the law, yet so long as he is the gift of God, there is mercy in the transaction. But Dr. Barnes thinks there was no mercy if it met the requirement of the law. He remarks:— "If it should be said that there was mercy in the gift of the Saviour, and that so far as that is concerned the transaction is one of mercy, though so far as the law is concerned the transaction is one of justice, it may be replied that this is not the representation of the Bible. The idea of mercy pervades it throughout. It is not only mercy in providing an atonement; it is mercy to the sinner. There is mercy in the case. There is love. There is more than a mere exaction of the penalty. There is more than a transfer. There is a lessening of suffering,' &c. Pp. 232, 233. No one doubts that in the Atonement there is mercy to the sinner; but we are not prepared to admit that the transaction (death of Christ) is not one of justice so far as the law is concerned. We think this is the representation of the Bible. The death of Christ either met the demand of law and justice, or it did not. If it did, then it was, so far, a legal transaction; then "stern, unbending justice" was honored in his death. But if it did not, then we fail to see how divine justice is vindicated in granting pardon through him; how God can be just in justifying the believer any more than he could have been in justifying an unbeliever, seeing that justice had no part in the transaction. We have been accustomed to regard this declaration of the apostle (Rom. 3:24-26) as positive proof that justice was satisfied in his death, in order that pardon might be granted to the believer without slighting the claims of the law; and it does not seem to be possible to vindicate the system on any other principle than this. And if we only admit that Christ suffered the penalty of the law, which was death, as the Scriptures abundantly show, then there is no difficulty whatever in this view. And we can only decide that "there is a lessening of suffering" by being able to measure the extent or severity of the sufferings of Christ, which no finite mind can do. Dr. Barnes' statement is made on the supposition that the sufferings of the lost will be eternal. But we have seen that the idea of "eternal punishment" does not embrace eternal suffering, but rather eternal death; "everlasting destruction," as the apostle says. It is possible, and the thought is not at all unreasonable, that the sufferings of Christ, the Son of God, as far exceeded the sufferings of a human being, as he is high in his nature above man, or as his blood is more precious and of more worth than that of man. It is safe to say that that remark of Dr. Barnes was made without due consideration. Did you ever study the cheapness of some pleasure? asks some writer. Do you know how little it takes to make a multitude happy? Such trifles as a penny, a word, or a smile, do the work. There are two or three boys passing along—give them each a chestnut, and how smiling they look! they will not be cross for some time. A poor widow lives in the neighborhood, who is the mother of half a dozen children. Send them half a peck of sweet apples, and they will be happy. A child has lost his arrow—the world to him—and he mourns sadly; help him to find it, or make him another, and how quickly will the sunshine play over his sober face. A boy has as much as he can do to pile up a load of wood; assist him a few moments, or speak a pleasant word to him, and he forgets his toil, and works away without minding it. Your apprentice has broken a mug, or cut the vest too large, or slightly injured a piece of work. Say, "You scoundrel," and he feels miserable; but remark, "I am sorry," and he will try to do better. You employ a man; pay him cheerfully, and speak a pleasant word to him, and he leaves your house with a contented heart, to light up his own hearth with smiles and gladness. As you pass along the street, you meet a familiar face; say "Good morning," as though you felt happy, and it will work admirably in the heart of your neighbor. Pleasure is cheap. Who will not bestow it liberally? If there are smiles, sunshine, and flowers all about us, let us not grasp them with a miser's fist, and lock them up in our hearts. No, rather let us take them and scatter them about us, in the cot of the widow, among the groups of children in the crowded mart, where men of business congregate, in our families, and everywhere. We can make the wretched happy, the discontented cheerful, and the afflicted resigned, at an exceedingly cheap rate. Who will refuse to do it?—Ex. Religion Cannot Be Measured by Words
It is impossible to find out how much religion a man has in his heart by measuring the length of his tongue. The Sabbath-School.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
Lesson for Pacific Coast.—December 8.
PAUL's first epistle to the Corinthians was written because grievous errors had arisen in the church, which he wished to correct. The fifth, eleventh, and fourteenth chapters are especially directed against certain evils of which that church was guilty. The existence of these faults was made known to Paul, not by revelation from Heaven, but by the reports of those who came from Corinth, and because one sin, at least, was so well known as to be the subject of common talk. See 1 Cor. 1:11; 5:1; 11:18. FROM the consequences attending their perversion of the Lord's Supper (chap. 11:30), we may well suppose that this error was even more displeasing to God than the sin described in chapter five; the reason why is, that it shows great lack of spiritual discernment, and such a degree of irreverence as would lead to the commission of almost any sin. We learn from verses 20-22, 33, 34 that they were in the habit of making a regular meal of the Lord's Supper, each one helping himself to all that he could get, making this solemn ordinance a disgraceful revel. There are at the present day well-meaning persons who, although they do not behave so badly as did the Corinthians, make the Lord's Supper an occasion for partaking of an ordinary meal. Concerning such a custom the apostle exclaims in astonishment: "What! have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not." Verse 22. Dr. Barnes has so excellent a comment on this verse,—condemning not only the gross perversion of the Lord's Supper, but another evil that has sprung up in most modern churches,—that we quote it:— "Do you not know that the church of God is not designed to be a place of feasting and revelry, nor even a place where to partake of your ordinary meals? Can it be that you will come to the places of public worship, and make them the scenes of feasting and riot? Even on the supposition that there had been no disorder, no reveling, no intemperance, yet on every account it was grossly improper to make the place of public worship a place for a festival entertainment." What would the good Doctor say if he could know that many, even of the denomination which he so worthily represented, think that a church is not well equipped unless it has a commodious kitchen attached. As for those who eat a regular meal in church, as an act of piety, let them learn by these words of Paul, how displeasing their course is to God: "Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation." 1 Cor. 11:33, 34. IN the twelfth chapter of 1 Corinthians Paul corrects some errors in regard to Spiritual gifts. It seems that the church at Corinth had some members who were highly gifted, and others who aspired to prominent positions. There was strife among the brethren as to whose endowments were the greatest. Many seem to have thought that one who had no remarkable gift was of no use in the church, and accordingly became puffed up when they viewed their own gifts. In the course of the chapter, the apostle, under the figure of the body, shows that although different members have different offices, none are to be despised on account of their lowly position. He then gives them a strong but delicate reproof for their course. He urges them to earnestly desire the best gifts that God has to bestow, but proceeds to show them something more excellent than high endowments, without which these amount to nothing. That something is charity, or, more properly, love. THE first three verses of chapter 13 show the importance of love. From them we learn that it is possible for a person to have faith in the highest degree, to be able to prophecy, to have all wisdom, to be able to speak as an angel, to be charitable (in the common acceptation of the term) to the extent of giving away all his goods, and finally, to give up his life as a martyr, and still amount to nothing in the estimation of God. Such a statement as this must certainly have caused the Corinthians to regard themselves with less complacency. It should have this effect on us. WE cannot here enter into any extended examination of this subject. One or two references must suffice. John says, "For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments." 1 John 5:3. Paul says that "love is the fulfilling of the law;" and Christ himself said that all the law and the prophets were summed up in two great principles, love to God, and love to man. Matt. 22:36-40. We conclude, then, that this thing which is greater than all gifts of prophecy or of wisdom, and without which they are nothing, is simply the keeping of the commandments of God, not as a matter of outward form, but from the heart. Peter says that charity [love] covers a multitude of sins. 1 Pet. 4:8. And James says that the same result is accomplished by converting a sinner from the error of his ways. James 5:20. But a sinner is converted only by the application of the law of God. Ps. 19:7; Rom. 7:7-10; James 2:25. So we see again that the keeping of the commandments is that charity of which Paul writes. IN the fifteenth chapter of 1 Corinthians we have direct and most unmistakable proof of the falsity of the doctrine that men are naturally immortal, or that they receive their reward at death. The apostle first proves (verses 3-5) beyond all cavil that Christ was really raised from the dead; for if the testimony of above five hundred persons who saw him alive after he had been put to death, does not establish the fact beyond all contradiction, then nothing can be proved. But, since it is a fact that Christ is raised from the dead, how can any one say that there is no resurrection from the dead? See verse 12. The same power that raised up Christ, has promised to raise all mankind; and the fact that Christ was raised is proof of his power to fulfill this promise; hence Christ's resurrection is a pledge of the general resurrection. Whoever says that there is no resurrection, denies that Christ is risen, and virtually declares that the twelve apostles and the "five hundred brethren," were false witnesses. Verses 13-16. IN this manner Paul establishes the fact that there will be a resurrection. There can be no misunderstanding of his argument; it is as simple as it is conclusive. Then he goes over the ground again, and shows what would be the consequences if there were no resurrection. "For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised; and if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished." Verses 16-18. Mark that Paul does not say that if the dead rise not something terrible will happen to those who have fallen asleep in Christ; he does not say that in such a case they will perish; but he says that if the dead rise not, those who have fallen asleep in Christ "are perished." Then it necessarily follows that they are in the same condition now (with a resurrection in prospect) that they would be in to all eternity, if there were no resurrection. Why is it that they are not really perished? Because they have the promise of a resurrection from the dead,—a promise made by One who never fails. The condition of the dead now is in nowise different from what it would be if Christ had not died and rose again, nor from the condition that those will be in who will suffer the second death, except that in that case there is a limit and in those there is none. There can be no other fair construction put upon Paul's words here; whosoever, therefore, affirms that the righteous dead are now enjoying the bliss of Heaven, must leave Paul out of the account. "But now is Christ risen from the dead and become the first-fruits of them that slept." Verse 20. Some have imagined a discrepancy between this statement and the fact that some were raised from the dead even before Christ's death; and others have tried to make a difference between the resurrection of those persons,—Lazarus, the widow's son, etc,—and that of those who were raised at or after Christ's resurrection. But this is not necessary in order to harmonize the Scripture narrative, for there is no discrepancy. Lazarus had as literal a resurrection as did Dorcas, or Christ himself. His resurrection, however, was accomplished only by virtue of Christ's promised death and resurrection, which, since God had promised it, was the same as already accomplished. Christ was the first-fruits; not the first in point of time, but the chief. And since his resurrection was that by which the resurrection of all was made possible (see verse 21), it might be said to be the first. In one sense it was indeed the first, for as soon as it was promised it was virtually done; had this not been the case, no miracles of raising the dead could have been done before the resurrection of Christ. "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." Verse 22. There is no condition to this statement; it includes both good and bad. Those who claim that only the righteous are raised, must also claim that none but the righteous die in Adam; for the "all" in the latter part of the verse must mean the same as the first "all." Adam sinned, and thus fell under the power of death; and since he could not transmit to his posterity that which he did not possess himself, all men are mortal. We receive mortality as part of our inheritance from Adam. But to all the promise of a resurrection is given. This, however, can give no satisfaction to the universalist, for Paul immediately adds: "But every man in his own order, Christ the first-fruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming." This implies that there will be some who are not Christ's at his coming, and this fact is plainly stated in Matt. 13:38-42; 25:31-41, etc. The first are raised to life eternal; the second, to damnation, eternal death. John 5:28, 29. As shown above from verses 13-18, Paul declares that the dead have no conscious existence—neither good nor bad have inherent immortality. In verses 51-55 he tells us how and when immortality will be given to the righteous. At the last trump the living shall be changed "in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye," and the dead shall be raised incorruptible. "For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality." This must be done because corruption cannot inherit incorruption. Verse 50. It follows from this that the good do not at death receive their incorruptible reward, for incorruption is not put on till Christ comes. When that event shall take place, and the mortal shall have put on immortality, "Then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory." Then, and not till then, will the redeemed shout, "O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?" THE apostle fitly closes this chapter with the following words: "Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labor is not in vain in the Lord." The word "therefore" shows that this is a conclusion from what has preceded. Why should they be always abounding, and how do they know that their labor is not in vain? Because they now know that there will be a resurrection, and that death is not the end of all things; they can look beyond for a reward. The conclusion is unavoidable, however, both from this and previous verses, that if there were no resurrection from the dead, all their labor would be in vain. The common view that man is naturally immortal, robs Christ of his highest prerogative, that of life-giver, and opens the way for men to ignore him altogether; but the view which we advance is in harmony with the Bible statement that "the gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ, our Lord," and is consistent with the fact that the redeemed will be able to say, "Thanks be to God, who giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." It was a saying of the martyr Bradford, "that he would never leave a duty till he had brought his heart into the frame of the duty; he would not leave confession of sin till his heart was broken for sin; he would not leave petitioning for grace till his heart was quickened and enlivened in a hopeful expectation of more grace; he would not leave the rendering of thanks till his heart was enlarged with a sense of the mercies which he enjoyed, and quickened in the return of praise." Death of Eld. J. N. Andrews.
By Benjamin L. Whitney
THE telegram which was sent Sunday evening, October 21, announcing the death, that day of our dear Bro. Andrews, has already reached the friends on the other side of the water, bearing a burden of sorrow to many hearts. Doubtless a fitting tribute to his life and work has already been offered in the columns of the Review, by those better qualified for this task than I. It only remains to me, therefore, to speak of these last weeks of association with him, and the laying down of his life work, the incidents of which will, without doubt, be of interest to his many friends in America. When we arrived here, the 26th of last July, we found Bro. Andrews very feeble, wasted almost to a skeleton, able to take a few steps with great effort, and to sit up a little while during the day; yet at work whenever he had a little strength. He was finishing his articles for the July number of Les Signes, which was already much behind. The prospect of death seemed very near to him, yet he clung to the work, and to life for the work's sake. We persuaded him to omit his articles for the August issue, hoping he might gain a little strength, but he continued to fail, and if at times there seemed to be a brief truce with the dread disease, it was soon broken by the re-appearance of the severe symptoms, which left him each time weaker. His pen, once laid down, was not taken up again, but he continued to read the proof of the paper, as had been his custom, lying in bed, in spite of the entreaties of all that he would spare his strength. The evening of the day he finished his work on the October number he was taken with severe pain in his bowels, and though everything was done that could be done for his relief, it seemed to grow more and more severe till his sufferings were intense, and no relief was found until an opiate was administered the next evening. This partially subdued the pain, and he found some rest. As the pain subsided, he was troubled with hiccoughs, which continued at frequent intervals until the day of his death. But the intense severity of his suffering seemed past, and the merciful Father, to whom our prayers for his relief went up almost without ceasing, was pleased to give him partial respite from suffering. For some weeks he had been unusually cheerful and calm, willing to live or die, as God saw fit, and this feeling of cheerful trust seemed to deepen. Even in the midst of severe suffering he praised God and dwelt upon his mercy and love. The cares and burdens of the past were all laid aside, and though his interest in the work did not abate till he lost all consciousness of this world, he seemed to feel no anxious care. No murmur of impatience or complaint escaped him, even in the midst of severest suffering, but he expressed much affectionate gratitude to those who administered to his wants. The Swiss Conference, which was appointed to meet here, assembled according to appointment, and I was necessarily much occupied, but found time to go to his room occasionally and assist in caring for him. He begged me not to leave the meetings to do for him, as his interest, he said, was wholly in the meeting. Lying on his bed, away from the sound of the meeting, he seemed to feel a constant sympathy with the work going on, and realized more than ever the blessing of the Spirit of God. Friday evening he said to his mother that he felt sure the brethren had been praying for him, for he felt such a blessing, and relief from suffering; and this was true. At the close of the Sabbath a special season of prayer was held for him in the meeting hall, by the brethren and sisters assembled. In speaking that evening of his desires, he said that he would not, if he could, take the responsibility of deciding whether he should live or die. He would gladly live to work in the cause if that were God's will, but he was willing to die if God saw best. He felt that his case was wholly in the hands of the Lord. Sunday morning, at his request, a few met in his room for prayer, after which he seemed much relieved, although he continued to fail steadily through the day. Half an hour before his death he seemed to lose consciousness, and at five o'clock P. M. he fell asleep, without a struggle or a groan, surrounded by those nearest of kin, and those who loved him tenderly. During the last two weeks of his life he had completed what business arrangements he had to make, and as his last act, about three hours before his death, with his own trembling hand and with great apparent satisfaction, he assigned to the mission $500 of his estate not already disposed of. His mind seemed clear as long as consciousness remained. It was a privilege highly appreciated by his aged mother to be able to minister to her only remaining son, in his last hours,—a service which was rewarded by his grateful and affectionate appreciation. The funeral was held Tuesday afternoon in the mission hall, and attended by a large proportion of the brethren and sisters, who remained one day after the Conference for that purpose. A goodly number of the citizens paid their respects to his memory, accompanying the funeral cortege to the cemetery. Brief remarks were made by the writer from 2 Tim. 4: 7, 8, which were translated into the French. Bro. Bourdeau followed with remarks in French, and Bro. Erzenberger concluded the services in German at the grave. A lot in a pleasant part of the beautiful cemetery was purchased by the mission, and we laid him away after the custom of the burial service in America. The coffin was covered with beautiful flowers, the sincere offerings of loving hearts and tributes of respect from the citizens, and we left him to peaceful rest till He in whom he fell asleep shall awaken him to the full fruition of the "blessed hope" which cheered him through life. The following resolutions were passed, with deep feeling, by the Conference:— WHEREAS, Our Heavenly Father has seen fit, in his providence, to lay his hand upon us in the removal from our midst of our dearly beloved brother, Eld. J. N. Andrews; therefore, Resolved, That while we humbly and reverently bow in submission to the will of God, we feel that we have sustained an irreparable loss, both personally and in the work, and that in view of this loss we will consecrate ourselves anew to the work to which he gave his life, seeking to follow his example of sacrifice and devotion to the cause of God. Resolved, That we hereby tender to his afflicted family our deepest sympathy in this their great bereavement. We need not speak of the sense of loss we feel in the household and in the work. A place is left vacant, and we know not how it can be filled, but we are comforted by the faith that our loved brother rests in Jesus, and that the work is God's. Though he may, "bury his workmen," yet he will "carry on his work." Bale, Suisse, Oct. 24. B. L. WHITNEY.