Earlier text: The Standard of Christian ExcellenceThe Ten Kingdoms in the Dark Ages.
IN the treaty of Verdun, 843, it will be remembered Louis the German received the whole of Germany east of the Rhine. And as he was the first sovereign who ruled over the Germans, and over no other western people, he is considered in history as the founder of the kingdom of Germany. At his death his son Charles the Fat received from him, Swabia—Alemania—and, as before shown, by the death of his two brothers Charles inherited all Germany, was made emperor, and by invitation assumed the sovereignty of France, but was deposed, and Arnulf, his nephew, chosen king of Germany in his place. Arnulf, like Charles the Fat, went to Rome and was crowned emperor. He returned and in 890 inflicted such a defeat upon the Northmen that "they never again returned in such numbers as to be a national peril." Arnulf died in 899 and was succeeded by his son Louis the Child, six years old, who nominally reigned till 911. His reign was one of the darkest periods of German history. For as soon as the Magyars—Hungarians—heard that Arnulf had been succeeded by a child, "they swept into Germany in vast numbers, and fearful was the havoc they caused in every part of the kingdom." "Where the Northmen had whipped with cords, these barbarians lashed with scorpions." And there was no leader around whom the nation could rally. At this time and for about three hundred years Germany consisted of five duchies,—Swabia, Bavaria, Franconia, Saxony, and Lorraine. Louis the Child died in 911. Even while he lived, the dukes were virtually kings in their duchies; and when he died they could have been altogether kings, but the dangers threatened by the Magyars, the Slavs, and the Northmen, obliged them to form a central government for the common defense. Accordingly, the nobles assembled at Forcheim, and by the advice of Otto, the duke of Saxony, Conrad, duke of Franconia, was made king. But his election displeased the dukes of Bavaria, Swabia, and Lorraine. The duke of Lorraine rebelled outright. Those of Bavaria and Swabia yielded, but the bishops, jealous of their power, induced Conrad to force a quarrel with these as also with Henry, duke of Saxony. This fairly created an anarchy all his days, but on his death-bed, 918, he recommended that Henry of Saxony be chosen king in his stead. With Henry began the rule of the House of Saxony which continued one hundred and six years, 918-1024, through Henry I., Otto I., Otto II., Otto III., and Henry II. Henry I. delivered Germany from the scourge of the Magyars and so thoroughly restored peace and order throughout the dominion that when he died, 936, "every land inhabited by a German population formed part of the kingdom, and none of the duchies were at war with each other nor among themselves." Before his death the nobles had, in national assembly, promised Henry that his son Otto should be recognized as his successor, and the promise was kept. Otto I. the Great reigned from 936-973. His half-brother, however, raised a rebellion and was joined by the dukes of Franconia and Bavaria. But by the help of the duke of Swabia the rising was put down. A second rebellion was led by Otto's brother, helped by the dukes of Franconia and Lorraine. This, too, was quelled to the immense advantage of Otto. Having secured peace in Germany, and made himself master of the kingdom, as none of his immediate predecessors had been, Otto was by far the greatest sovereign in Europe. But not content with this, he decided to take a step that caused Germany ages of trouble—he put himself into the hands of the Pope and became the "protector of the church." The way it was brought about was this: Adelaide, the young widow of Lothair, the son of King Hugh of Provence—Burgundy—had refused to marry the son of Berengar, king of Lombardy. For this she was cast into prison and cruelly treated. She appealed to Otto. Her appeal not only touched his sympathies, but aroused a strong ambition, for he saw the way thus opened to imperial authority. At the head of a strong force he crossed the Alps in 951. He displaced Berengar and assumed, himself, the title of King of Italy. Besides this, he was so fascinated by young Queen Adelaide that in a few weeks he married her. His son Ludolf thought his rights threatened by this marriage, returned sullenly to Germany, and with the archbishop of Mainz formed a conspiracy against his father. Otto, hearing of their plot, hastened home, leaving Duke Conrad of Lorraine to attend to affairs in Italy. But Conrad restored the crown to Berengar, and returned to Germany and joined the conspiracy of Ludolf and the archbishop. War broke out. The majority of the kingdom were indeed opposed to Otto, being displeased with his ambitious designs in Italy. But Conrad and Ludolf basely invited in the terrible Magyars, which so disgusted the Germans that the whole nation with one consent rallied to the support of Otto. At the battle of Lechfeld, 955, Conrad was slain and the Magyars received such an overwhelming defeat that the deliverance of Germany was complete. From that time the Magyars began to settle, and "adapt themselves to the conditions of civilized life in the country which they now occupy," and so arose the kingdom of Hungary. Meantime Berengar and his son Adelbert had laid such exorbitant taxes, and had made themselves so tyrannical in Italy, that an embassy was sent by the most of the bishops and princes, as well as the Pope, imploring Otto to come again and deliver them. The Pope at this time was John XII., to whom as such we shall pay our respects in another place. The legates of the Pope "were enjoined to offer the imperial crown to the king of Germany, provided he drove out the tyrants, and delivered the mother of all churches from the miseries she groaned under and could no longer bear."—Bower's Popes, John XII. At this Otto went a second time into Italy, in 962, and was crowned emperor by the Pope. "The emperor, at the request of the Pope, promised upon oath to defend the Roman Church against all her enemies; to maintain her in the quiet possession of all the privileges she had enjoyed to that time; to restore to the Holy See the lands and possessions that belonged to St. Peter, as soon as he recovered them; to assist the Pope to the utmost of his power when assistance was wanted; and lastly to make no alteration in the government of Rome without his knowledge or approbation. At the same time the emperor confirmed all the grants of Pepin and Charlemagne; but obliged in his turn the Pope and the Romans to swear obedience to him, and promise upon oath to lend no kind of assistance to Berengar or to his son Adelbert, from whose tyranny he was come to deliver."—Id. Thus was finally developed the Holy Roman Empire, that mightiest political weapon of the Papacy. After Otto, the sovereign crowned in Germany always claimed it as his right to be afterwards crowned in Milan with the iron crown of Lombardy, and in Rome with the golden crown of the empire. In 964 Otto returned to Germany, increased the number of the duchies, and nobles, and as he was now the protector of the church, and was set for the promotion of her interests, he immensely increased the importance of the prelates. "They received great gifts of land, were endowed with jurisdiction in criminal as well as civil cases, and obtained several other valuable sovereign rights." Thus he sowed the seed that bore bitter fruit for Germany in the humiliation of Henry by Hildebrand. In 966 he went once more to Italy, where he remained till his death, May 7, 973. Nothing of particular note occurred in the reigns of the three following emperors of the House of Saxony, except that the last one, Henry II., made a treaty with Rudolf III. king of Burgundy, by which at the death of Rudolf his kingdom was to be united to the empire, and showed himself so dutiful a son to the Papacy that both he and his wife were made saints. At Henry's death, in 1024, the great nobles met at Oppenheim and elected Conrad II., a count of Franconia, king. With him began the rule of the House of Franconia, which continued one hundred years, through Conrad II., Henry III., Henry IV., and Henry V. Through all there were plottings and counter-plottings, and wars, civil as well as foreign, which kept the nation in a constant turmoil. In accordance with the above-mentioned treaty, Conrad, in 1032, received the kingdom of Burgundy into the empire, and in 1034 he received in Geneva the homage of its leading nobles. Conrad died in 1039 and was succeeded by his son Henry III., whom, as early as 1026, he had caused to be elected king of Germany, and whom he had made duke of Bavaria in 1027, duke of Swabia and king of Burgundy in 1038. At this time the vices of the clergy all over Europe had become most scandalous, the Popes setting the infamous example. There were three rival claimants for the tiara. Henry entered Rome with an army in 1046, and summoned a council, and had all three of the rival Popes deposed, and raised to the Papal See, Clement II., who crowned him emperor. In the succeeding ten years of his reign it devolved upon Henry to appoint three more Popes in the succession, and as all of them were energetic administrators, and exerted themselves to carry out the policy of Henry, they did much to purify the ecclesiastical system of Europe. But the empire paid dearly for this effort to purify the Papacy. Hildebrand was chaplain to one of the Popes, Gregory VI., whom Henry had caused to be deposed, and went with him into exile. He afterwards became cardinal, sub-deacon, and confidential adviser to each of the last two Popes whom Henry appointed, as well as to all the others till his own accession, in 1073, and during all the time he was forging the weapons by which he would revenge upon the empire the insulted dignity of the Papacy. It is not, after all, a thing to be wondered at that men should reject the great truths of revelation. These truths are spiritual, and the carnal mind has no capacity for receiving them; they are holy, and are never likely to please ungodly hearts, and, besides, they are humbling to the creature and give all glory to God, and hence proud flesh is at drawn daggers with them. If the unregenerate world received the gospel with favor it would cast great doubt on the divine nature of the doctrine; but when the unrenewed heart rejects it with disdain, it does, in its own blind way, acknowledge that the teaching is not of man, neither by man. If the gospel were of the world, the world would love its own; but because it is of God, therefore the world rejects it. Have we not been too much staggered by the fact that the direction of modern thought is against evangelical truth? Was not ancient thought the same? Is not that text always true, "My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord."—Sel. If you intend to do a mean thing, wait till to-morrow. If you are to do a noble thing, do it now. The Origin of the Week.
By C. P. Bollman
UPON this subject the Christian at Work of November 4, says:— "The Chaldeans and the Egyptians got their year by observing the first rising of Sirius before the sun. In like manner we must conclude that the fact that seven days marked each changing of the moon would form the most natural division of time into weeks following the division into days covered by the rising and setting of the sun. It may be stated here that the Sabbath was known to the Egyptians, and observed before the exodus; and it was this Sabbath which was adopted by the Hebrews and given a new significance, just as were the three sacrifices . . . and various other features which were borrowed from the Egyptian customs, and adopted under the theocracy." The time was, not many years since, when such sentiment could have found no place in any so-called orthodox religious paper; but that day is past, and now even leading denominational organs vie with the secular press in giving to the world theories which are designed to discredit the writings of Moses. It is probably true that the Chaldeans and Egyptians did get their year in the manner indicated by the Christian at Work; but it is very far from the truth to say that either they or any other nation got the week from the changes of the moon. There is absolutely nothing in nature to suggest the weekly cycle; and so patent is this fact that the "Encyclopedia Britannica," art. "Calendar," says:— "As it [the week] forms neither an aliquot part of the year nor of the lunar month, those who reject the Mosaic recital will be at a loss, as Delambre remarks, to assign to it an origin having much semblance of probability." As intimated in the foregoing the "Mosaic recital" does at least have "much semblance of probability;" and the truth is, that aside from the Bible account of creation there is in history, as in nature, nothing whatever to suggest the origin of the week. We learn from secular history that the week "has been employed from time immemorial in almost all eastern countries;" but aside from revelation we know absolutely nothing of its origin. That the weekly cycle could not have been suggested by the changes of the moon is evident from the fact that the moon does not change once in seven days; but once in seven days and nine hours, as nearly as may be; and an attempt to account for the week in that manner would, it is safe to say, never have been made had it not been that the very existence of such a cycle unaccounted for by either science or history (aside from the Mosaic record), is an unanswerable testimony to the truthfulness of the Bible account. It was for the purpose of destroying this testimony that infidel patrons of "science falsely so-called" first invented and gave to the world the hypothesis which the Christian at Work, a leading Presbyterian paper of the nineteenth century, dilutes with a few grains of true science and authentic history and sends forth as orthodox Christian teaching! But is it not as true now as it was 1853 years ago that if men "believe not Moses and the prophets, neither will they" believe the words of Christ himself? And if we do not believe Moses how can we believe Christ? for he indorsed the writings of Moses. According to the book of Genesis both the week and the weekly Sabbath had their origin in the facts of the creation; and to assign to them any other origin is to deny Genesis. But if we deny Genesis we must in like manner deny the whole Pentateuch. And when shall we stop? Evidently just when infidelity directs us to stop. It is a fact that the Chaldeans and the Egyptians had both the week, and some knowledge of the weekly Sabbath; but it is very evident that this knowledge had been handed down to them by tradition from the Garden of Eden. From the "Encyclopedia Britannica," art. "Babylonia," we learn that the Babylonians had the Sabbath, and that they called it the "rest." But how came they to apply that title to the last day of the week? Only one answer can be given; i. e., they had a tradition of the creation and of God's rest upon the seventh day, just as the Scriptures teach. And as Babylon (Babel, Gen. 11:9) was, we might say, the mother of nations, it is not difficult to imagine how the Egyptians as well as the other nations of the east come to have a knowledge of the week and of the "rest" which was the last day of the week. But again: We know that the Hebrews had the Sabbath in Egypt, and that Moses and Aaron taught them to keep it (Ex. 5:4, 5); and that the Egyptians would not allow them to do so. But it by no means follows that they got the Sabbath from their oppressors; indeed, that seems very unlikely, even aside from the Bible narrative which absolutely forbids it. However, there is no reason whatever why we should suppose that the Hebrews got the Sabbath from the Egyptians. It is far more reasonable to suppose that they had it independent of the heathen among whom they dwelt. It is more than probable that Abraham kept the Sabbath; and we know that Jacob was familiar with the week (Gen. 29:18, 27); and, as with the Babylonians and Egyptians, to have the week was likewise to have at least some knowledge of the Sabbath. It is then altogether likely that the Hebrews took the knowledge of the Sabbath to Egypt with them; and the same is true of nearly all their ceremonies. It has been argued, however, that because the religious forms of the Hebrews resembled those of the Egyptians, therefore they borrowed them from the Egyptians. But it would seem that even modern science should be able to see that such a conclusion is by no means necessary. The fact of this resemblance does point to a common origin, but that common origin is fully accounted for in the common origin of the race. Immediately after the fall, God ordained forms for his own worship, and he instituted sacrifices which were to point forward to the promised Saviour. It was these forms that the heathen had corrupted, it was these sacrifices that they had perverted. And when God took his people by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, it was that they might be free from such corrupting influences; that they might keep his Sabbath, a thing they were not permitted to do in Egypt; and that they might offer unto him offerings in righteousness, free from the contaminating influences of pagan worship. Certainly the idea that the Hebrews borrowed these things from the Egyptians can be received only by those who deny the divine inspiration of the Pentateuch; it certainly cannot be by those who believe with the apostle Paul that "all scripture is given by inspiration of God." No MATTER how the earthquake came, whether from causes scientifically accounted for, or by divine instrumentality, it had a powerful moral effect. All the houses were open. People fled from them, forgetting to lock doors, or were afraid to delay that long, and hence a vast quantity of valuables was at the mercy of the thief, but no thief came. A terrible fear of consequences held the most wicked heart in thrall. And even in the parks, where people promiscuously huddled together, and pocket picking was the easiest thing in the world, not a farthing was lost. Immorality was suddenly brought to a stop. The lewd characters left their gilded homes and took to the open lots, nor gave their gewgaws a thought. They could be seen sleeping prone upon the ground, or drawn up against each other; some in silks hastily grabbed in sudden flight, or in scanty night wear, in which they had been overtaken, and were afraid to delay to change. A noted character was seen reverently reading the Bible. Some one approached her and offered to engage in conversation with her, but she was too absorbed to be disconcerted, and seemed thoroughly in earnest. It is not believed that the impression will be lasting, but as brief as it was, it shows where poor humanity goes in its moments of extremity. Some weeks prior to the shocks a lady in the upper wards was robbed of a lot of fowls. The conscience-stricken thief returned them the day after the shock by throwing them into the premises. So that restitution was one of the effects of the calamity. There was likewise a remarkable absence of profanity. Men who scarcely open their mouths unless to let out oaths, were as careful of their language as though they were under the halo of the presence of ladies. What a pleasure it would be if the moral effect of the earthquake would continue. As heavy as the pecuniary loss of the city has been, if it were affected by an equal amount of moral improvement, it would temper the situation.—Charleston (S. C.) Dispatch. HUMILITY is a beautiful and priceless grace. The words of the psalmist are noteworthy: "Though the Lord be high, yet hath he respect unto the lowly; but the proud he knoweth afar off." There is no one grace that Christ personally exemplified more conspicuously than humility. Witness the washing of the disciples' feet! Can anything be conceived of more touching and expressive? What a rebuke to pride, to ambition, to strife for place or preferment, to all feeling of exaltation or personal worthiness! Could those rebuked disciples have ever forgotten the lesson? The same great lesson is taught by Christ in the parable of the two men who "went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican." The lesson is made the clearer and the more emphatic by the sharp contrast in which it is presented. The characters are diametrically opposite. The Pharisee stands forth in his saintly robes, and erect posture, and bold attitude, and perfect assurance, and sublime self-complacency, as the very impersonation of spiritual pride, self-righteousness, self-satisfaction, burning incense in the temple of God to his own virtue, and flaunting that "filthy rag" before Heaven and in the face of the publican, his fellow-worshiper. The publican, trembling and abashed to find himself in the holy temple, overwhelmed with a sense of his sinfulness and unworthiness as he comes into God's presence, "standing afar off," afraid so much as to lift up "his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner"—impersonates the virtue of Christian humility—acts out the spirit of genuine repentance and Christ-like humility. There can be no genuine religion without humility. Even if we were not sinners, the dust would become us; God is so exalted, so holy, so infinitely just, and we are "nothing and less than nothing, and vanity." The very angels who surround the throne veil their faces and cast their crowns at his feet, and cry, "Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty!" But we are sinners, rebels, all defiled with sin, and how shall we come before God? how take his sacred name on our lips? how offer acceptable worship to him? how find favor at his hands? Is it any marvel that the proud, self-glorifying, boasting Pharisee, praying in the temple, found no audience with God, and went away without a blessing?—Homiletic Review. Items from the General Conference.
By Editor
SINCE my last report, there have been meetings of the Conference, the International Tract and Missionary Society, Publishing Association, Health Institute, and Sanitarium Improvement Company. The three associations last named have completed their business. Of the other associations, much of the work is done in committees, some of which have not yet reported. We shall give only a few items of general interest, that were brought to light during the meetings of the various associations. Perhaps the committee whose recommendations arouse the most lively interest, is the Committee on Destitute Fields. This committee has not yet completed its work, but has made the following recommendations, which have been approved by the Conference:— - That Elder S. N. Haskell go to England.
- That Elder E. W. Whitney, of New York, go to Central Europe.
- That W. L. H. Baker and wife, of Pacific Press, Oakland, go to Melbourne, Australia, to labor in the office of the Bible Echo.
- That M. G. Huffman, of Indiana, labor in Virginia.
- That B. F. Purdham, of Virginia, labor in Indiana.
- That Elder E. W. Farnsworth go with Elder Haskell to England.
- That Elder S. Fulton, of Tennessee, labor in Florida.
- That E. E. Marvin, of Indiana, go to Tennessee to assist Elder Rees.
- That Elder G. G. Rupert, of Kentucky, go to British Guiana, S. A., and visit other parts of the Southern field as he may think best.
- That Elder W. D. Curtis, of Kansas, go to Australia.
- That Elder H. Shultz, of Nebraska, devote his time to the German work in America, under direction of the General Conference.
- That Elder J. F. Hanson, of Chicago, labor among the Scandinavians of New York City and Brooklyn.
- That Elder Louis Johnson, of Minnesota, devote a portion of his time to the Scandinavian work in Chicago.
- That Elder J. H. Cook, of Kansas, go to Kentucky at his earliest convenience, to take the place of Elder G. G. Rupert, who goes to South America.
- That Elders C. L. Boyd, of Oregon, and D. A. Robinson, of Massachusetts, go to South Africa as soon as they can leave their present fields of labor.
- That Elder John Fulton, now of California, go to the North Pacific Conference to labor with Elder Boyd, and to take the place of the latter when he shall go to South Africa.
In connection with the meetings of the Conference, and of the International Tract and Missionary Society, the following interesting facts were made known:— The number of pages of tracts distributed by this society during the year, is 1,250,000. Besides this, the society uses over 600 copies of the SIGNS OF THE TIMES, 350 of Gospel Sickle, 250 Sentinels, 100 Good Health, and over 400 foreign copies of periodicals. This is, of course, entirely outside of what is done by the various State Tract and Missionary Societies. There are over thirty city missions, employing about one hundred workers. During the year, 19,243 Bible-readings have been held by these city mission workers, with families and individuals. It must be remembered that the city mission work is but little over a year old, and that most of the missions have been established but a few months. These workers have sold reading matter to the amount of $6,266.90, and have given away a very large amount besides. They have also taken 1,287 yearly subscriptions to various denominational periodicals, besides many for less than a year. In connection with the city missions in a few of the sea-ports there are ship missionaries. In this work 6,225 ships have been visited, and supplied with 1,100,353 pages of reading matter, and 97,411 papers. Two hundred and twenty-nine ships are regularly supplied with the SIGNS OF THE TIMES or some other denominational journal. To show how God can make even the wrath of man to praise him, we give an incident related by Bro. A. T. Robinson, of the Brooklyn (N. Y.) Mission. A clergyman who saw the interest that was being awakened for the truth, as the result of the faithful labors of the city missionaries, made an appointment to preach against the Sabbath, announcing as his subject, "Who changed the Sabbath?" A young man, a printer, saw the announcement, and as he had had some curiosity on that subject, he and his wife went. Instead of gaining information upon the Sabbath question, he heard a tirade against Seventh-day Adventists. This did not satisfy the young man, but it served as an advertisement of the mission, where he went and heard the truth. As the result of this one sermon against the Sabbath, six persons have begun to keep it "according to the commandment." Since the mission started in Brooklyn, only a short time ago, seventeen have begun to keep the Sabbath. Bro. W. H. Saxby, of the Washington (D. C.) Mission, gave an interesting account of his work. He found great difficulty in starting the work, but has sold in that city over $700 worth of books, and has held nearly 1,000 Bible-readings. Thus the truth is spreading. The meetings of the Health Institute Association brought out many interesting facts, of which we can give only a few. This work was established in 1867 under the name of Health Institute, but was reorganized in 1876 under the name of Medical and Surgical Sanitarium. The Sanitarium is located at Battle Creek, having a large corps of competent physicians, with J. H. Kellogg, M. D., as superintendent. The business has outgrown the frame building that was first occupied, and now occupies a building with the following dimensions:— Entire length, 475 feet; height, 84 feet; width of main part, 40, 46, and 54 feet; length of promenade in verandas and halls, more than half a mile; floor space, more than two acres. This building is probably the most perfectly ventilated structure in the United States, is heated by steam, and lighted by the Edison incandescent electric light. Each room has an independent supply of fresh, pure air at all times, without the necessity of opening windows, and the ventilation and heating are so arranged that one room may have a warm, moist atmosphere, while that of the adjoining one may be cool and dry, if so desired. The sewerage is perfect, and such is the care taken that nowhere about the building, from basement to attic, is there the slightest unpleasant odor. The main building will accommodate nearly 250 patients, and about 150 more can be accommodated in the cottages near by, and belonging to the institution. During the past year the patronage has been larger than ever before. The average number of patients has been about 225, and the entire number treated within the year is not less than 1,200. Of course a small army of helpers is needed to properly care for so many, and of these there are about 150. The receipts from patients for the year have been over $122,000, against $86,000 last year. To feed the large family requires over 1,200 barrels of flour a year; 1,000 bushels of potatoes, and 700 barrels of apples. Four barrels of milk per day is consumed. The table is bountifully supplied with healthful food tastefully served. One rarely sees so large an institution as this carried on with so little apparent friction. While this institution is not sectarian, and patients of all classes are received, all having perfect freedom in matters pertaining to the conscience, it is the aim of the managers to have a religious influence pervading the house. Family worship is regularly sustained morning and evening, and on Sunday evenings there is usually a sermon in the parlor. Religious services for the helpers are also frequently held. There is a Sabbath-school of 160 members in connection with the institution, and also a missionary society conducted by the workers, which uses 300 copies of Good Health, 200 copies of the SIGNS OF THE TIMES, and 50 of the American Sentinel. During the session of the Conference, the early morning is devoted to religious services, a social meeting being usually held, the days are devoted to business, and the evening to preaching or some other interesting exercise. Monday evening was left for the teachers' meeting of the Battle Creek Sabbath-school, which those from abroad were invited to attend. On Tuesday evening (Nov. 23) there was a Bible-reading by Elder A. T. Robinson; on Wednesday evening a sermon by Elder I. D. Van Horn, and on Thursday evening one by Elder M. C. Wilcox, of England. Friday evening was devoted to a consideration of some features of the city missions, the time being occupied by Elder N. C. McClure, of San Francisco, Elder A. T. Robinson, of Brooklyn, Elder H. W. Miller, of Grand Rapids, Mich., and Elder George Starr, of Chicago. On Sabbath there was a sermon by Elder S. N. Haskell, on the subject of Education. Every day at eight o'clock A. M. a large class of ministers and other laborers has met in the tabernacle to receive instructions from Dr. Kellogg, on the subject of health and temperance. These meetings are very interesting and profitable, and those who have attended are becoming fitted to preach the gospel of health, while they are teaching people the way of life eternal.
W.
Battle Creek, Nov. 28.