Earlier text: Gratuities and WillsProgress of the Cause.
By James White
The accounts from different parts of the wide field, given from week to week in the Progress Department of the REVIEW, are cheering. And we would here suggest that all laborers in the cause give brief reports as often as once in two weeks. This would give greater variety, and fresher news, than to report more lengthily once a month, or once a quarter. And let all report. We want to hear from all, if it be but a few words. Brevity, and modesty of expression, are becoming to those who are just entering the field. But the present progress of the cause is by no means confined to the labors of our ministers in new fields. The spirit of labor is to some extent, in some places, getting hold of leading members of our churches. This is as it should be. And this must be the case in all our churches, and with all the members of our churches, before the work can move forward as it should. We are happy to report the good work still moving forward in the church at Battle Creek. There has been but little preaching since the work commenced about New Year’s, at the close of our General Conference. The principal part of the labor has been done by brethren and sisters visiting from house to house, exhorting and praying. Many in our midst were backslidden. Some were in a low, desponding, discouraged condition. These were exhorted with many encouraging words. And in some cases fervent prayer has been continued several hours, until answers to prayer have been realized, and the restoration, or conversion, has been wonderfully clear and remarkable. Eld. J. H. Waggoner has taken a leading part in this work, and has labored arduously and with success. This labor, in connection with considerable Office work, has taxed his strength severely. His labors in this church, and at the Office, at the present time of need, are highly valued. And we are in hopes that, after a little rest, our brethren in Maine may also enjoy his labors. But the good work in this city is steadily moving forward. Meetings, besides on the Sabbath, have been held only evenings. And, as Bro. Waggoner remarked, the brethren have had so much to do from house to house that they could hardly find time to hold many evening meetings. We now have three evening meetings each week, which are large and exceedingly interesting. They usually commence with a discourse of about twenty minutes in length, and hold about two hours, the remainder of the time being all occupied in remarks from those who have labored from house to house, and the happy and decided testimonies of the converted and the reclaimed. Our brethren and sisters have been greatly blessed, and are becoming hopeful and strong in the Lord in the act of helping others. At the commencement of this work, a call was made for men and women to volunteer to go out in the city as missionaries, to converse and pray with those who were in a low state, and report at a following meeting. These reports became very interesting. This work called many to our meetings. Soon backsliders and sinners were invited forward for prayers. The Spirit of God moved upon the people, and many came forward. And so the work has been carried on from house to house, and in the house of worship, for the last five weeks, and it is now at the point of its highest interest. And from what we have already witnessed, we may safely conclude that as long as the same means are employed, just so long will the same results appear. Many have been reclaimed, and there are several cases of clear conversion. Those laboring in the several departments of the publishing work, have shared in the good work, which is regarded as only commenced. What our people in this city have already felt of the spirit of labor, and also of freedom, makes them long for more. A work of this nature is needed in our churches everywhere. And we earnestly recommend to all who wish to enjoy a similar blessing to employ means which have brought such happy results in the church at Battle Creek. We do not advise our churches to obtain the labors of our ministers. Laborers are few, and the harvest is plentiful. Our ministers cannot answer a tithe of the calls to labor in new fields. And, again, it is not preaching that our churches need. It is action upon the light they already have. There is a law which rules alike relative to physical, mental, and spiritual power, that activity is conducive to strength. It is action that makes the blacksmith’s arm strong. It is mental action that gives power to the brain. And it is also personal effort, and individual action, in the things of the Spirit of God that gives men and women spiritual power. Our people generally are spiritual dwarfs, when they might be giants in the Lord. They are waiting for the few ministers among us to warn the world, and at the same time carry the churches on their shoulders, while they feel at liberty to plunge into the world, and become buried up in its rubbish. The only remedy we have to suggest for them is to lay aside unnecessary cares of this life, and to put forth individual effort for the good of those around them. In fact, this is, in our opinion, the only remedy. We did expect that our people in the several States would immediately form Tract Societies, and at once enter upon the duties set forth in the published plan of such societies. For this very object General Conference was held two months earlier, that these societies might be organized, and have several months to work before the more active business season should come. Immediate action on the part of the General Conference Committee and the State Conference Committees seems necessary to put this system of labor in motion. Why not take hold of the work at once? Why wait till the most favorable season of the year shall be past? Our Publishing Association has on hand more than $20,000 worth of books, pamphlets, and tracts, ready to go out on their mission. And why not let the people have them this winter and early spring, when they have time to read? God has wonderfully blessed our publishing work, so that we have a goodly list of publications, such as the cause demands. They will meet the wants of the people if they can get them. And our faithful brethren have taken stock in this work and have sent in their free-will offerings, so that we have the means to furnish any amount almost of our valuable works. And our people are dying spiritually for want of the very work necessary to get these books before the people. The General Conference made choice of men of experience who now enjoy the strength and freshness of manhood as General Conference Committee, and it will be expected, at such an eventful crisis as the present, that they will act decidedly and vigorously. Nothing could give more courage and strength to the friends of the cause than to see these men passing from State to State, putting things in working order in every part of the field. We are receiving calls from all parts of the land for preachers and for publications. The publications we can furnish; but the preachers cannot be found. May the Lord of the harvest hear our prayers for help in this direction. We give the following from Bro. O. M. Olds, of Nebraska, Jan. 22, 1872, which shows61 WHAT OUR TRACTS ARE DOING.
“Eld. James White: My Dear Brother—About three years ago I embraced the seventh-day Sabbath through the labors of a missionary of the Seventh-day Baptist Society, Eld. James Bailey, while residing at Boscobel, Grant Co., Wis. About that time, one of your faith, Frank Thompson of that place, gave me two or three small tracts treating upon the mortality of man. Those tracts have much interested me, and I desire to hear and learn more of the important truths you teach.” “I am preaching the truth according to the light I have. I am convinced that man is mortal, and that we are standing in the last days of earth’s history. Six years I labored in the capacity of preacher with the Methodists.” “I am unable to buy tracts or books. I have not the means to do so. I dislike to beg; but I want to know more of God’s truth. I confess there is much darkness in me. I need a clear understanding of God’s truth. I am going to ask of you a favor: Can you send me a complete list of your tracts, or a theological compendium of your faith? If so, I will make you this promise, that when I shall be able to do so I will pay you for them. I want to investigate the whole matter from beginning to end.” “May God bless you in all that is truth, is the prayer of one who seeks to know the truth and by it be made free.” There are thousands of intelligent men and women in our country, whose minds are prepared to receive the light. They would receive it as readily as Bro. Olds has, could it shine in their path. We are very happy to receive all such orders. We have sent Bro. Olds six dollars’ worth of our publications, free to him, for which we charge the Book Fund four dollars. And as they go out to their western destination we breathe the prayer that the blessing of God may go with them. Before closing this hasty article we wish to make a few suggestions upon an article in another page of this paper on the subject of 1. The best legal advice should be obtained as to all the particulars of the form and manner of a will, before writing it. Not twenty-five per cent of what the friends of the cause have willed to our Publishing Association has been collectable, simply because proper counsel has not been obtained by them. Not only should our friends seek legal advice, but also the advice of those in whom they have confidence as safe counselors in the case. 2. Aged and feeble persons, who may have but a few thousands, and who wish to be secure of a support during their lifetime, and also that a part, or all, that remains of their property after their death should be used for the benefit of our institutions, should by all means make their will. 3. Those in youth and middle age, who have abundance, should actively give of that abundance when means are wanted. Twenty dollars was worth more to the cause ten years since than one hundred dollars is in 1872. And there can be no safer rule by which to judge of the future in this matter than by the past. Therefore, twenty dollars appropriated in 1872 will tell as much for the advancement of the cause as one hundred dollars, should time last so long, in 1882. How proper, then, that those who have more than a liberal competency should appoint and apply themselves to the work of a faithful execution of their wishes in the appropriation of their abundance while they can attend to it themselves, and while means can tell to the glory of God. Those who live to witness the close of our message will see millions in the hands of those who profess faith in the coming of Jesus, for which they had no use in this life, and which they neglected to use when it could have done good. 4. Men excuse themselves, in purchasing more lands, and making unnecessary improvements, on the plea that their property will turn better in “the selling time.” We do not know what these men mean by the selling time. If they refer to the injunction of Jesus, then we will say the selling time always has been the time when it was necessary for believers to sell property to support the cause of God. Twenty years since, this was necessary among the few friends of the cause, who had to exert themselves to sustain the cause in its infancy. Among the noble examples of sacrifice in that time, we will mention Hastings, of New Hampshire, Edson, of the State of New York, Lyon, Smith, and Kellogg, of Michigan. These men have all lived to see the gracious and beautiful fruits of their sacrifices. And a host of others may now rejoice that they had the honored privilege to sacrifice more or less for the cause in the days of its feebleness and adversity. Strictly speaking, so far as our mind can grasp this subject, the selling time is in the past, unless the providence of God shall open the way to use means as we have not in times past. Should our people all put into the treasury a tithe of their increase, there would be more means on hand than could be judiciously appropriated. In our system of benevolence our people do not half come up to the figures of our own plan. Instead of a tenth, they do not give a twentieth. The New England Conference probably comes up nearest the figures of any of our Conferences. Their membership of only three hundred pay $3,000 annually, which is ten dollars each. Michigan has a membership of about sixteen hundred, and pays less than $6,000 annually. And all who are acquainted with the facts in the case, will decide that our New England brethren have less property on an average than our people in Michigan. Our people in New England do not exceed the plan of S. B. The brethren in Michigan fall below two-thirds, at least. When they should pay $18,000, they only pay $6,000. And Michigan is a sample of nearly the entire Middle and Western States. Our people in Michigan can pay $20,000 annually, and yet add largely to their wealth. With this view of things, and the abundance annually far exceeding the calls for means, when shall we reach “the selling time?” Brethren, be not misled and destroyed by the “deceitfulness of riches.” You that have a surplus should use it in the cause when it will help the cause. And you who wish to benefit the cause of God in your wills, should, after making suitable provisions for children and wife, or others, assign that portion you wish to give to the cause of God, directly to the cause at your decease, and not after the decease of your friends. And then, after you have made your will, see to it that while you live you are a faithful steward of your Lord’s property, and use for God what you can spare of it while you live, rather than leave it to be appropriated, perhaps, by careless hands, and when it will do little or no good. God is graciously favoring the down-trodden cause of unpopular Bible truth. And the time has fully come for united and energetic action of all our churches, and by the hosts of scattered ones throughout the land. In God let us arise and fulfill the mission the Master has given us. J. W. The United States in the Light of Prophecy.
In the last preceding article of this series, the startling fact was noticed that for several years a movement has been on foot, daily growing in extent, and importance, and power, to fulfill that portion of the prophecy of Rev. 13:11–17, which first calls forth the dissent of the objector, and which appears from every point of view the most improbable of all the specifications; namely, the erection of the image and the enforcing of the mark. Beyond this nothing remains but the sharp conflict of the people of God with this earthly power, and the eternal triumph of the overcomer. An Association, even now national in its character, and endeavoring, as is appropriate for those who have such objects in view, to secure their purposes under the sanction of the highest authority in the land, the National Constitution, already has this matter in hand. In the interest of this Association there is published in Philadelphia, a semi-monthly paper called the Christian Statesman, in advocacy of this movement. Every issue of that paper goes forth filled with arguments and appeals from some of the ablest pens in our land, in favor of the desired Constitutional amendment. These are the very methods by which, in a country like ours, great revolutions are brought about; and no movement has ever risen so suddenly as this to so high a position in public esteem with certain classes, and taken so strong a hold upon their hearts. Says Mr. G. A. Townsend (New World and Old, p. 212.):— “Church and State has several times crept into American politics, as in the contentions over the Bible in the public schools, the Anti-Catholic party of 1844, &c. Our people have been wise enough heretofore to respect the clergy in all religious questions, and to entertain a wholesome jealousy of them in politics. The latest politico-theological movement [italics ours] is to insert the name of the Deity in the Constitution.” But it may be asked how the Sunday question is to be affected by the proposed Constitutional amendment. Answer: The object, or, to say the least, one object, of this amendment is to put the Sunday institution on a legal basis, and compel its observance by the arm of the law. At the National Convention held in Philadelphia, Jan. 18 and 19, 1871, the following resolution was among the first offered by the Business Committee:— “Resolved, That, in view of the controlling power of the Constitution in shaping State, as well as national, policy, it is of immediate importance to public morals, and to social order, to secure such an amendment as will indicate that this is a Christian nation, and place all Christian laws, institutions, and usages in our government, on an undeniable legal basis in the fundamental law of the nation, especially those which secure a proper oath, and which protect society against blasphemy, Sabbath-breaking, and polygamy.” By Sabbath-breaking, is meant nothing else but Sunday-breaking. In a convention of the friends of Sunday, assembled Nov. 29, 1870, in New Concord, Ohio, the Rev. James White is reported to have said: “The question [of Sunday observance] is closely connected with the National Reform movement; for until the government comes to know God, and honor his law, we need not expect to restrain Sabbath-breaking corporations.” Here again the idea of the legal enforcement of Sunday observance stands uppermost. Once more: The Philadelphia Press, of Dec. 5, 1870, stated that some Congressmen, including Vice President Colfax, arrived in Washington, by Sunday trains, Dec. 4, on which the Christian Statesman commented as follows (we give italics as we find them):— 1. “Not one of those men who thus violated the Sabbath is fit to hold any official position in a Christian nation. *” “He who violates the Sabbath may not steal, because the judgment of society so strongly condemns theft, or because he believes that honesty is the best policy; but tempt him with the prospect of concealment, or the prospect of advantage, and there can be no reason why he who robs God will not rob his neighbor also. For this reason, the Sabbath law lies at the foundation of morality. Its observance is an acknowledgment of the sovereign rights of God over us.” “2. The sin of these Congressmen is a national sin, because the nation hath not said to them in the Constitution, the supreme rule for our public servants, ‘We charge you to serve us in accordance with the higher law of God.’ These Sabbath-breaking railroads, moreover, are corporations created by the State, and amenable to it. The State is responsible to God for the conduct of these creatures which it calls into being. It is bound therefore to restrain them from this, as from other crimes, and any violation of the Sabbath, by any corporation, should work immediate forfeiture of its charter. And the Constitution of the United States, with which all State legislation is required to be in harmony, should be of such a character as to prevent any State from tolerating such infractions of fundamental moral law.” “3. Give us in the National Constitution the simple acknowledgment of the law of God as the supreme law of nations, and all the results indicated in this note will ultimately be secured. Let no one say that the movement does not contemplate sufficiently practical ends.” From all this we see the important place the Sabbath question is to hold in this movement—the important place it even now holds in the minds of those who are urging it forward. Let the amendment called for be granted, “and all the results indicated in this note,” says the writer, “will ultimately be secured;” that is, individuals and corporations will be restrained from violating the Sunday observance. The acknowledgment of God in the Constitution may do very well as a banner under which to sail; but the practical bearing of the movement relates to the compulsory observance of the first day of the week. Even now the question is agitated why the Jew should be allowed to follow his business on the first day after having observed the seventh. The same question is equally pertinent to all seventh-day keepers. A writer signing himself “American” in the Boston Herald of Dec. 14, 1871, said:— “The President in his late message in speaking of the Mormon question, says, ‘They shall not be permitted to break the laws under the cloak of religion.’ This undoubtedly meets the approval of every American citizen, and I wish to cite a parallel case, and ask: Why should the Jews of this country be allowed to break the laws and keep open their stores on the Sabbath under the cloak of their religion? while I or any other true American will be arrested and suffer punishment if we do the same thing? If there is a provision made allowing a few to conduct business on the Sabbath, what justice or equality can there be in any such provision and why should it not be stopped at once?” And this question, we apprehend, will be very summarily decided, when once the Constitutional amendment has been secured. At a Ministerial Association of the M. E. church held in Healdsburg, Cal., April 26–28, 1870, Rev. Mr. Trefren of Napa, speaking of S. D. A. ministers, said, “I predict for them a short race. What we want is law in the matter.” Then, referring to the present movement for a law, he added, “And we will have it too; and when we get the power into our hands, we will show these men what their end will be.” From a work recently published by the Presbyterian Board of Publication, entitled “The Sabbath,” by Chas. Elliott, Professor of Biblical Literature and Exegesis in the Presbyterian Theological Seminary of the North West, Chicago, Ill., we take this paragraph:— “But it may be asked, Would not the Jew be denied equality of rights by legislation protecting the Christian Sabbath and ignoring the Jewish? The answer is, We are not a Jewish, but a Christian, nation; therefore, our legislation must be conformed to the institutions and spirit of Christianity. This is absolutely necessary from the nature of the case.” There is no mistaking the import of this language: No matter if the Jew does not secure equal rights with others. We are not a Jewish nation, but a Christian; and all must be made to conform to what the majority decide to be Christian institutions. This affects all who observe the seventh day, as much as the Jews. And we apprehend it will not be a difficult matter to lead the masses, whose prejudices incline them in this direction, to believe that it is “absolutely necessary” that all legislation must take such a form, and cause them to act accordingly. Several years since, Dr. Durbin, of the Christian Advocate and Journal, gave his views on this subject as follows:— “I infer, therefore, that the civil magistrate may not be called upon to enforce the observance of the Sabbath [Sunday] as required in the spiritual kingdom of Christ; but when Christianity becomes the moral and spiritual life of the State, the State is bound through her magistrates to prevent the open violation of the holy Sabbath, as a measure of self-preservation. She cannot, without injuring her own vitality, and incurring the divine displeasure, be recreant to her duty in this matter.” At a meeting held at Saratoga Springs, Aug. 12, 1860, ex-president Fillmore said that “while he deemed it needful to legislate cautiously in all matters connected with public morals, and to avoid coercive measures affecting religion, the right of every citizen to a day of rest and worship could not be questioned, and laws securing that right should be enforced.” And the Christian Statesman of Dec. 15, 1871, speaking of the general disregard of the Sabbath [Sunday] in the arrangements for welcoming the Grand Duke Alexis, says:— “How long will it be before the Christian masses of this country can be roused to enact a law compelling their public servants to respect the Sabbath?” Religious Liberty under the Proposed Christian Amendment.
By T. P. Stevenson
Mr. Editor:—The remarks in the REVIEW, No. 5, of present volume, on the movement to secure a religious amendment to the Constitution of the United States indicate a fear, which, I am aware, is shared by many, that the proposed change will operate oppressively toward the observers of the seventh-day Sabbath. I am able, from the most intimate and thorough knowledge of the movement, to assure you and your readers that no more zealous and consistent friends of religious liberty are anywhere to be found than the active promoters of this amendment. But, lest mere assurances be deemed of little worth, let me ask attention to the following considerations:— 1. Laws, guarding the sacredness of the Sabbath, have been in force in nearly all our States from the beginning of their history. In some States, at least, these laws contain special clauses exempting those who conscientiously observe some other day than the Lord’s day, from their operation, except so far as may be necessary to guard the quiet of other worshipers. With these laws, and with this modifying provision, the friends of the proposed amendment are satisfied. We are only seeking to bring the Constitution of our Government into accord with them, and to guard them in this way against the total overthrow with which they are seriously threatened. And we shall be behind no portion of our fellow citizens in advocating, wherever necessary, such modifications of existing laws as shall relieve true Sabbath keepers from anything actually oppressive in their operation. 2. Under which kind of government do seventh-day Sabbatarians imagine they will have the greatest security and comfort, and the fairest field for the advocacy of the truth—a government which knows no God, no higher law, and no Sabbath? or a government which acknowledges God and accepts his law as the supreme rule of its conduct? A government which holds its legislatures and courts, carries its mails, moves its armies, teaches in its schools, indiscriminately on all days of the week, attracting only Sabbath-breakers to its service, and laying no restraint on the avarice and lust which would leave man no time for religion, is powerfully hostile to piety and good morals, and equally unfriendly to all classes of Christians. No thoughtful and intelligent man will deny that we are making rapid progress toward such a state of government. Congress has ventured of late on two occasions to sit on the Lord’s day; and the Board of Visitors at the Naval School at Annapolis recently found the studies prosecuted on all days of the week alike. The carrying of the mails, the travel on our great thoroughfares, the unrestrained Sabbath-breaking in all our cities, are more potent and more alarming facts. The proposed amendment heralds, and, thoroughly discussed and deliberately adopted, will crown a thorough, practical reformation in the Government on the subject of Sabbath-keeping. Will not you, dear brethren, rejoice in this? 3. The advocates of the seventh day as the Sabbath rest their belief and practice in this matter solely on the word of God. They challenge discussion in the light of the Scriptures. To this tribunal they appeal. Can any damage accrue to their cause from the acknowledgment by the government of the same high authority? Yet that is all we propose. We do not foreclose discussion of this or any other question. We simply ask that in our common government, that great central institution which covers and affects us all, and which can never by any possibility be divorced from all religious and moral character and influence, the law of God, be acknowledged as of supreme authority. Is not that law the palladium of human rights and liberties? Can any man or any class be injured by its recognition? 4. That the observers of the seventh-day Sabbath should sometimes be led to regard all Sabbath laws with dissatisfaction is not surprising. But though the overthrow of these laws might be felt as a partial relief in some respects, would it not be obtained at a fearful cost to the interests of religion and the cause of Christ? You, dear brethren, are not to be numbered with the immoral and infidel classes who are striving to obliterate every Christian feature in our government. As earnest friends of the great law of the Sabbath, a law to be obeyed by kings and governments as well as individuals, and families, and churches, your place is logically and consistently with the friends of the proposed amendment. We hold to the same law, differing only as to its interpretation. The charity and confidence due among brethren, and a common regard for the best interests of our country, demand that we labor together for its acknowledgment by our government. With sincere respect, I am,
Yours truly, T. P. STEVENSON,
Cor. Sec. of the National Association.
Philadelphia, Jan. 24, 1872. The National Reform Convention at Cincinnati.
Correspondence of the Detroit Daily Post. Cincinnati, Jan. 31. The National Convention, to secure a religious amendment to the Constitution, met to-day at Thorn's Hall, and about 250 delegates were present from different States. The convention was called to order by Prof. O. N. Stoddard, of the Wooster University, of Ohio, and the object of the convention was fully stated by the Rev. D. McAllister, the Secretary. Prof. Stoddard read the call for the convention. M. B. Hogans, one of the Judges of the Superior Court of Cincinnati, was chosen President. Judge Hogans delivered an address on taking the chair. He congratulated the delegates that they had met peacefully, without regard to sect or party, to discuss questions of much moment, and he welcomed them to the State and city—the heart of the Nation. He firmly believed a vast majority of the people of the United States approve of the scope and end of this movement—the explicit acknowledgment of God in the Constitution—is but a recognition of an obligation on the part of the State, as binding on the National conscience as on that of its independent members. The nation is not a compact, and does not live by the will of a man. It has its foundation in man's nature, and existed before constitutions and laws. People clamor for legislation against evil, but forget that insidious forces, tending to National ruin, find strength in the fact that the temple which the Nation has built for itself, does not blaze with the glory of ineffable presence, nor does its garments, made with its own fingers, shimmer with the halo of its divine origin before the people, and so, casting and reflecting the influence of the State on the people, and the people back on the State, the process of decadence may go on to the utter ruin of the Nation and its temple. He would not speak of methods for attaining the end desired by this convention. The agitation of this question, he felt sure, would not end till rightly settled, for we have learned from our own history that in the long run the people are right. Letters were read from Judge Strong, of the Supreme Court of the United States; Prof. J. Seely, of Amherst College; Dr. Patterson, of Chicago, and others, expressing regret at inability to attend. Secretary McAllister read a report of his doings since October, 1871. Information had been received of 30 organizations, with memberships of between 200 and 300, besides there has been much public discussion. Within the year, over 200 public meetings were held. A National Convention was deemed advisable, and Cincinnati was selected as the place, because it was the scene of the agitation of the question of the Bible in the schools. Experience confirms the belief that the progress of a movement depends on the thoroughness of its presentation to the minds of intelligent citizens. The schedule of the topics for discussion at the convention, with the names of the leading speakers, is as follows: “Relation of Education to Religion,” the Rev. A. D. Mayo; “Moral Character and Accountability of the Nation,” Prof. J. R. W. Sloane; “Neutrality of the State in Morals and Religion, a Thing Impossible,” Prof. Taylor Lewis; “Relation of the Written Constitution to the true Character and Welfare of the Nation,” Prof. O. N. Stoddard; “Practical Value and Effect of the Proposed Amendment,” the Rev. T. O. Stevenson. The Secretary suggested the publication of the proceedings to stimulate lecturers and to keep the discussion before the people. He believed that, in the language of the distinguished Judge who presided over this convention, “the Christian sentiment in regard to the government of this country is crystallizing, and this amendment is the form it must take.” The disturbing element came by a notice given by F. E. Abbott, editor of the Toledo Weekly Index, a paper devoted to the interests of free religion, that he desired to utter a remonstrance against the object of this convention. Objection was made, and he appealed to the chair to say whether or not he could utter such remonstrance. Thos. Shaw, of Cincinnati, said if this were a National Democratic Convention, a Republican would hardly insist on naming a candidate for President, and he thought the same rule should apply here. The Rev. A. Ritchie thought a respectful remonstrance ought to be received, as it would provoke discussion, and if this movement could not bear discussion or light, it ought to be abandoned. Chauncey Barnes of Athens, Ohio, welcomed this element of opposition. It was the scourge that would elicit the truth. Jesus Christ was the more clearly revealed because of the opposition he met. This remonstrance should be received in kindness, and killed by kindness. On motion, Mr. Abbott was requested to reduce his remonstrance to writing, and present it to the Committee on Business, to whom the whole subject was referred. At the evening session addresses were delivered by the Rev. A. D. Mayo and Prof. Sloane. The Committee on Resolutions reported a series of resolutions which were laid over for discussion. They declare that the State is exercising jurisdiction over 1,000,000 human beings, and as a sovereign arbiter of life and death, and as an educating power, it is necessarily a moral character, and the accountability is its own; that it is the right and duty of the United States, as a Nation settled by Christians, with Christian laws and usages, and with Christianity as its greatest social force, to acknowledge itself in its Constitution to be a Christian Nation, and that a failure by this Nation to acknowledge its relation to God has fostered the theory that the Government has nothing to do with religion but to let it alone; and that the State laws in favor of the Sabbath, Christian marriage, and the use of the Bible in the public schools, are unconstitutional; that we recognize the necessity of complete harmony between our written Constitution and the actual facts of our National life; and the true way to effect this harmony is not to expel the Bible and abrogate all the laws enforcing Christian morality, and abolish all devout observances in connection with the Government, and all idea of God and religion from our schools, but to insert an explicit acknowledgment of God and the Bible in the fundamental law, and that the proposed religious amendment is directly opposed to a union of the church and the State. The convention will close its sessions to-morrow. A Parallel Found.
By Roswell F. Cottrell
CHRIST was accused by his enemies of breaking the Sabbath. And many in our day have laid hold of and repeated this accusation, as one of their best arguments for the abolition of the Sabbath. We have thought that their audacity in re-iterating the false accusation of the enemies of Jesus, to justify their no-Sabbathism, was without a parallel; but we were mistaken; as the following extract from history will show. “The Bishop Natalis, of Salona in Dalmatia, had been guilty of gross sensuality, and had utterly neglected the duties of his office. He had enriched his relatives with presents of gold and silver vessels belonging to the church, and had wasted much of its revenue in luxurious banqueting. Gregory sharply reproved him, and threatened him with suspension from office. Natalis had the audacity to defend his excesses by alleging that he followed the example of Christ, who was called ‘a gluttonous man.’ The two cases are precisely parallel, only that the Saviour defended himself against the charge of Sabbath-breaking, claiming that what was done was “lawful” to be done on the Sabbath day, that is, in perfect harmony with the Sabbath law, and therefore no violation of it; whereas, the charge of gluttony he made no effort, as far as is revealed, to repel. The Bishop may have argued that the fact of his not repelling the charge was an evidence of its truth; but this subterfuge is not left open to the enemies of the Sabbath. WISE as serpents, harmless as doves.