Your ShelfYour Projects

The Review and Herald, Vol. 55, No. 5

WELL SAID

The Review and Herald

Thursday, January 29, 1880

Seventh-Day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Thursday, January 29, 1880

WELL SAID.

In a sermon published in the Examiner and Chronicle of Jan. 15, 1880, by Robert S. Mac Arthur, we find the nature and principles of the Sabbath beautifully set forth. In his discourse he presents four subjects—“The Christian Sabbath,” “Family Prayer,” “Reverence for the Bible,” and “Faith in Christ,” and likens them to the balustrades which the Hebrews were required anciently to put around the roofs of their houses as a safeguard against danger. Although in treating upon the Sabbath he has in mind, in a portion of his remarks, the first day of the week, he bears the following good testimony in regard to the ancient Sabbath, its immutability and perpetuity, which every one should read:—
Throw around it the balustrade of the Christian Sabbath. I use this combination of words designedly. A reference to the meaning of the word “Sabbath,” and its relation to our dispensation, will justify this use of the terms. Many things recommend this balustrade.
It is a very old one. It is hoary with age. Kingdoms have risen and fallen; empires have bloomed and withered; republics “have danced into light and died into shade,” but the Sabbath has remained. Before the days of Rome and Athens, before Babylon and Nineveh, before the royal tombs of Thebes and the mighty pyramids of Egypt, the Sabbath was. And after the gnawing tooth of time shall have crumbled them to dust, the Sabbath shall be. In the very dawn of time’s morning this balustrade was erected by the mighty and gentle hand of God. Two institutions of to-day have come down to us beautiful with the innocence and radiant with the glory of Eden,—the Sabbath and marriage. They have withstood the Fall and all its sad consequences; they have outlived all the upheavals of society, and all the cataclysms of time. They are absolutely essential to the highest good of the race; on the Sabbath stands the glorious structure of religious life, and on marriage the security and happiness of social life. Any theory of social life which lifts a rude and unholy hand against the sanctity and glory of marriage is to be received with the utmost detestation. You can usually judge the spirit and tendencies of any social theory by its attitude toward the marriage relation. This is often one of the best tests to be applied; it is oftenest at this point that some of the modern social theories reveal their wicked animus. Not less so is it of any system of opposition to the Sabbath. The man who strikes at either, strikes at all that is holiest in the best men and women, and also at much that is dearest to God. Palsied be the hand that would tear down this old battlement, the Sabbath of God!
This is also a battlement which has received in marvelous ways the sanction of God. Its observance is enforced in the general Mosaic code, and afterward with all the solemnities of the decalogue. We find the first reference to the Sabbath in the second chapter of Genesis, in connection with the close of the record of creation. In some respects the reference is the more impressive because the Sabbath is not mentioned by name. On that day God rested; he took pleasure in the works of his hand; that day he blessed, sanctified, and consecrated. Are not they right who hold that its institution is as ancient, and its obligation as universal, as the race? When we go to the sixteenth chapter of Exodus, we find that the observance of the Sabbath is one of the recognized institutions of the time. On the Sabbath no manna fell. There is nothing in this connection to intimate that the Sabbath was now first given; it is spoken of as something well known. Thus there was a Sabbath, not only before the giving of the law on Mount Sinai, but also, it seems, before Israel came out of Egypt. If this were the first mention of the day, how could Moses have understood God, and how could the people so readily have understood Moses? Already the keeping of the Sabbath was the “good old way.”
Soon after this it was re-enacted, written by the finger of God as the fourth commandment on the tables of stone, amid all the solemnities of the decalogue. The injunction in the fourth commandment, “Remember the Sabbath day,” indicates its previous observance. There are several other hints as to its pre-Mosaic origin; but of course I cannot this morning go at length into the discussion. It is sufficient to remember that the fourth commandment formed a part of the decalogue, and that the decalogue had an authority peculiarly its own; that the New Testament does not repeal it; that it was not for Jews alone, but is needful to and is binding on all men in all ages and climes. As Dr. Adam Clarke has said, “Thus we find, 1. That when God finished his creation, he instituted the Sabbath; 2. When he brought the people out of Egypt he insisted on the strict observance of it; and 3. When he gave the law he made it a tenth part of the whole; such importance has this institution in the eyes of the Supreme Being!” As time progressed, the Sabbath was held not in less, but in greater reverence. Isaiah utters his solemn protest against profaning it; he also pronounces large blessings on the proper observance of the day. Thus he speaks, chap. 58:13, 14: “If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honorable; and shalt honor him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words; then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.”
These are fitting words for to-day. The Sabbath-breakers of to-day ought to hear and heed them. Their special form of Sabbath-breaking is in turning their feet away from God’s house, doing their own ways, speaking their own words, and finding their own pleasure. God will not hold them guiltless who profane his holy day. Ezekiel also makes the profanation of the day foremost among the sins of the Jews during their times of declension. Their return to God’s favor and the revival of national prosperity were always marked by a regard for the Sabbath. Has the fourth commandment been abrogated? If so, by whom? If so, where? Christ came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. True, in fulfilling it, he defined it; but he made it the more binding. Who dare blot out the command which the finger of God has written in imperishable stone?

IMPORTANCE OF HOLY LIVING.

By J. M. Hopkins

BY J. M. HOPKINS.
“SEEK ye the Lord, all ye meek of the earth, which have wrought his judgment; seek righteousness, seek meekness: it may be ye shall be hid in the day of the Lord’s anger.” Zeph. 2 : 3.
There are several facts found in connection with the above admonition which render it vastly important for us. 1. It is addressed to those who live just before “the day of the Lord’s anger,”—just before the coming of the Son of man. Compare chap. 1 : 14–18 with Rev. 6 : 12–17. 2. It is addressed to those who live just before “the decree bring forth” (See chap. 2 : 2, in comparison with Rev. 22 : 11.), and consequently near the close of the Judgment. 3. It is addressed, not to the ungodly, but to the “meek of the earth.” Compare text with Ps. 37 : 11, and Matt. 5 : 5. 4. It is addressed to those who hear and obey the third angel’s message,—“Which have wrought his judgment.” Compare text with Rev. 14 : 12, and 12 : 17. 5. It is an exhortation to “seek,” that we may “be hid in the day of the Lord’s anger.”
With these considerations before us, the subject comes to our minds with an ever increasing interest. That we are fast approaching the time that “shall try every man’s work of what sort it is,” is proven by the united testimony of Inspiration. And with the light God has given us, our condemnation will be great if our work shall be poorly done.
“Seek ye the Lord.” It matters not what the occupation in life may be, every one, in order to be successful, must have some end in view. This must be the object of life, and for the accomplishment of this there must be resolution, self-denial, and untiring effort. Thus it is in the Christian’s life. First of all there must be a controlling motive, the object of every thought, the mainspring of every act. “A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways.” James 1 : 8. “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.” Matt. 6 : 24. Paul, in 1 Cor. 10 : 31, has given valuable instruction in regard to our manner of living: “Whether therefore ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God. If we heed this injunction, God will never suffer our feet to be moved, but will hide us in the “day of his anger.”
When we rise in the morning, the first inquiry should be, Lord, how can I best honor thee to-day? And as we go forth to enjoy the God-given blessings of a new day, let a tribute of praise and thanksgiving ascend to God for all his benefits. In the freshness of morning all nature seems to join in a song of gratitude and praise. And should not man, “the noblest work of God,” thus early “seek” his Maker? Before the cares of the day intrude, let a few moments, at least, be devoted to reading the Bible and sweet communion with God.
“Seek ye the Lord, all ye meek of the earth.” Nothing short of an entire consecration on the part of God’s people will meet this requirement. The little time yet remaining in which to prepare to meet the Lord is too precious to be divided between earth and Heaven. We should pay diligent heed to the words of Jesus: “Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness.” Matt. 6 : 33. And David’s prayer, “Unite my heart to fear thy name,” should be responded to with a hearty “Amen.”
“Seek righteousness.” This word is defined by Webster as follows: “Purity of heart and rectitude of life; conformity of heart and life to the divine law. . . . It includes all we call justice, honesty, and virtue, with holy affections; in short, it is true religion.” God would have his remnant church pure in heart and upright in deed. It is never safe for the Christian to lay down his armor and cease to strive earnestly for the victory over self and our common adversary.
“Seek righteousness.” “All thy commandments are righteousness.” Ps. 119 : 172. “Fear God, and keep his commandments; for this is the whole duty of man.” Eccl. 12 : 13. “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.” Matt. 19 : 17. “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments; and his commandments are not grievous.” 1 John 5 : 3. Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.” Rev. 22 : 14.
All through the word of God we find the commandments referred to as that rule of “righteousness” which we should “seek” to follow. By the successful efforts of to-day we gain strength for to-morrow; and thus, by divine grace, our characters may be continually molded, and brought into harmony with the divine law. “The path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day.” Prov. 4 : 18.
“Seek meekness.” Webster defines “meekness” thus. 1. “Softness of temper; mildness; gentleness; forbearance under injuries and provocations: 2. In an evangelical sense, humility; resignation; submission to the divine will, without murmuring or peevishness.” In the wisdom of God, his remnant people are called upon to obey a truth which separates from the world, and makes them in many respects “a peculiar people.” Many sacrifices must be made, many trials borne, and it will only be by a great work of grace that the strongest can endure. “And the dragon was wroth with the woman [the church], and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” Rev. 12 : 17. In order to stand unmoved in that time of trial and persecution, we shall need all the “meekness” and humility which the prayerful effort of years can acquire. To-day we are exhorted to “seek meekness,” and to make every possible preparation that we may be able to stand in that trying time. Soon the great realities of the Judgment will be upon us. If we fail to heed God’s warning voice now, we shall then be visited with his wrath. Then “seek ye the Lord, all ye meek of the earth, which have wrought his judgment; seek righteousness, seek meekness: it may be ye shall be hid in the day of the Lord’s anger.”

THE SAVIOUR'S BIRTH.

By Stephen H. Thayer

On Judah's hills the sun had set; The moon rode high o'er Olivet; The starry skies, in watchful rest, Leaned o'er the blue lake's peaceful breast; Fair Sharon's roses on the air Were breathing out their fragrant prayer, And o'er the sweet and holy calm The dews of Hermon shed their balm.
In that blest hour of peace and love, Bright angels left their home above, To bear to the unconscious earth The story of a Saviour's birth; To tell how God's beloved Son Left for a time his royal throne, To bring to our unworthy race The riches of his Father's grace.
Well might the herald angels then Sing, “Peace on earth, good will to men;” And all the host of Heaven reply, “All glory be to God on high!” And earth take up the joyful song, And rolling years the notes prolong, Till all creation join the strain, And shout as one the glad Amen! —Stephen H. Thayer, in N. Y. Observer.

THE LATE SUNDAY CONVENTION IN MASSACHUSETTS.

By Wm. Penniman

BY WM. PENNIMAN.
W. De Los Love, D. D., gave in the Evangelist of Nov. 13, 1879, a synopsis of the discourses delivered at the conventions held in Springfield and Boston, from which we extract the following:—
“Dr. Warren, of Philadelphia, had for his theme ‘Christ’s relation to the Sabbath,’ and showed that he sustained it, notwithstanding the many abuses by the Pharisees; and that he and his apostles authorized the change of day. The present writer had ‘St. Paul and the Sabbath,’ and showed that the apostle did not travel from Troas to Assos on Sunday, but on Monday; that the Christians held their meetings in the primitive era on the first, and not on the seventh, day; that Paul in Col. 2:16, by the word ‘Sabbath day,’ means the seventh day, and not Jewish feast days, but that does not show that the fourth command is abolished. Prof. Lummis, of Watertown, argued that men ought to keep either the first day or the seventh; that the Sabbath existed before Moses’ time; that the law to keep the seventh day is not now in force. Rev. Dr. Tucker, of Boston, showed the connection between the pre-Mosaic and the Sinaitic Sabbath, and that the former, at least, was intended for the whole human race. Rev. Dr. King, of Boston, having ‘The Sabbath and the Family,’ showed that the former antedated the latter, and also the church and the Bible, and that manifold are the blessings of the Sabbath to the household. Rev. Dr. Johnson, of Cambridge, had ‘Constantine and the Sabbath,’ and showed that Constantine’s edict in behalf of the Sabbath was really the demand of Christianity, such was the Christian observance of the Lord’s day.
Prof. Hovey read an essay on ‘The Sabbath in Jewish History,’ dwelling on the Jews’ great regard for the day, and the uselessness of human laws to deter them from it. Prof. Smyth spoke on the change to the Lord’s day, claiming that Christ and the apostles authorized the observance of the Lord’s day, and that though the Fathers did not connect the Lord’s day with the fourth commandment, principles in the latter may be appealed to to sustain the former. Joseph Cook’s essay on ‘The Physical, Intellectual, and Economical Advantages of the Sabbath,’ was read by Prof. Churchill. Dr. Rice, of Springfield, gave a paper on ‘The European Sabbath before and since the Reformation.’ He claimed that the Reformers were wrong in saying that the Lord’s day was of ecclesiastical, rather than of divine, authority; that Luther was wrong in saying that ‘no day is more excellent than another.’ Dr. Peck, of Brooklyn, showed that the Sabbath is a requisite to all forms of social regeneration. Rev. Dr. Bacon, of Norwich, spoke on the law of rest for all, necessary for the liberty of rest for each, and urged the necessity of enforcing the civil law. President Robinson, of Brown University, spoke of the importance of the Sabbath to our free institutions, showing that a Sabbath well kept gives right ideas concerning human rights and freedom, and leads to their due observance. Russel Sturgis, of Boston, spoke of the relation of merchants to the Sabbath, showing the value of their strict observance of it, even to not taking letters from the post-office on the Sabbath. Hon. William E. Dodge, of New York, spoke on ‘Railroads and the Sabbath.’ He said that freight trains are run more on that day than any other, and that stockholders are responsible for it. Rev. Renen Thomas, of Brookline, took the theme ‘Our Foreign Population and the Sabbath,’ showing the evils of Sabbath desecration in countries whence our foreign population comes, and arguing the danger of our having such a Sabbath here.
“Nine of the papers read at Boston were given the previous week at Springfield, preceded by an address by the president, Rev. Dr. Seelye, President of Amherst College.”
The preceding needs but little comment. It shows how the public mind is drifting on the Sabbath question. It is a strange assumption on the part of Dr. Warren that Christ and his apostles authorized a change of the day of the Sabbath, when not one word is said about it in the Bible.
According to the present method of reckoning time, the first day of the week terminated at midnight; then Acts 20:7 does not prove Sunday but Monday observance; for they broke bread Monday morning. Therefore, our opponents must either make Monday the Sabbath (if Paul’s breaking bread on that day constitutes it a Sabbath), or concede that Paul started on his long journey Sunday morning. Then away goes this pretended Sunday-pillar.
Any candid person, on reading the context of Col. 2:16, must admit that this text refers to feast days. Barnes, Edwards, and other able commentators, admit this. Mr. Love, finding himself in a muddle in trying to prove that the Sabbath is abolished, and fearing that he shall lose authority for Sunday-keeping, says, “But that does not prove that the fourth commandment is abolished.” A desperate effort to hold on to the fourth commandment, and yet abolish the very day it enjoins.
Prof. Lummis is very inconsistent in saying that we ought to keep either the first day or the seventh, and then saying that the law to keep the seventh day is not now in force. Why not in force, if, according to Mr. Love, the fourth command is not abolished?
Mr. Johnson’s view that Constantine’s paganized edict was a demand of Christianity is about as consistent as the remarks of a Jewish peddler with whom I conversed. I asked him if he kept the Sabbath (seventh day). He replied, “Yes; when I am in the city I keep it, but when in the country I keep Sunday.”
It is truly wonderful that the Reformers were so ignorant of the ecclesiastical origin of the so-called Lord’s day. The truth is, they were more honest than some of the theologians of this time.
It will be seen that Dr. Bacon and others urge the necessity of enforcing the civil law. These men make no allusion to the fact that there is a people urging the true Sabbath reform; yet their sentiments plainly show that they are not ignorant of this move.

A CITY RUINED.

DAMASCUS has been ruined by the opening of the Suez Canal. The overland trade, both Oriental and European, by caravan, with Bagdad and the Persian Gulf, has been diverted to the water-way. The competition of India and China in silk and sesame seed through the canal has sensibly affected the value of these products; the late discovery of alizarine has rendered valueless the cultivation of madder for export; and the diversion of large numbers of Moslem pilgrims from all parts of the East who had hitherto made Damascus their point of arrival and departure, with much profit to the city, to the sea-route by the canal, has contributed in no small degree to its downward progress. House rent has declined 30 and 50 per cent, and large numbers of empty houses in every part of the city indicate the general decline. The streets are filled with beggars, both Moslem and Christian, and that, too, in a city where eighteen months ago a beggar was a rarity. The more elevated districts of Lebanon, which formerly contributed the principal portion of mendicants during winter months, have this year sent double the number to swell the amount of local indigence. The far-famed eye of the East is now dull and lusterless.—Selected.

THE ANCIENT SABBATH.

By E. R. M.

While I have long believed that the Sabbath was given to man at creation, in accordance with the Mosaic account in Genesis, of the Hebrew Scriptures, I as firmly believe that God has always kept the day, as he did and does all the divine commands he has given to man; but I had suspected, till of late, that the Sabbath might have been quite generally neglected by the early post-diluvians, and so have accounted for the notice of the seventh day as a Sabbath, by Hesiod and Homer B. C. 900 years; Callimachus of B. C. 200; Theophilus, Porphyry, Eusebius, and others of a later date, by suspecting that the ancient Sabbath of creation had been brought to their notice, in part at least, by the Hebrews, after the giving of the ten commandments at Mt. Sinai. This might have been quite reasonable. But all admit, I believe, that God gave the seventh day as a Sabbath to the Jews; and common sense teaches me, and should, I think, teach every person possessed of it, that God never gave, or authorized the giving to any one, any other than the seventh day as a Sabbath; for, in so doing, he would be the author of the very confusion complained of by persons living in communities consisting of Hebrews or seventh-day Christians, and observers of the first-day. In all God’s dealings with man, there is not, and never can be, an instance of such folly. God is a being of order, and never the author of confusion.
It is, so far as I know, universally admitted, that the antediluvians kept the seventh day; the Eucharistic offerings of Cain and Abel, “in process of time,” literally “in the end of days,” referring to the Sabbath. There is also an agreement in opinion, so far as I know, as to the “seven days” in which Noah waited, in sending the dove from the ark, referring to a division of time into weeks of seven days, with the probability of a Sabbath, and if so, the seventh day. As to the general, or even universal division of time into weeks of seven days by the early post-diluvians, and the general, or even universal observance of the seventh day as a Sabbath, I do not now entertain a doubt.
Eusebius says, “Almost all philosophers and poets acknowledge the seventh day as holy.” Porphyry says, “The Phoenicians consecrated one day in seven as holy.” Theophilus, A. D. 267, concerning the seventh day, says, “The day which all mankind celebrate.” Callimachus, B. C. 200, alludes “to the seventh day as holy;” as did Homer and Hesiod B. C. 900. (Rev. J. M. Foster, in the Christian Statesman.) And there is recent unmistakable evidence, reaching back nearly to the deluge, not only as to the division of time into weeks, but also as to the observance of the seventh day as a Sabbath of “rest.” I will mention one. In the Encyclopædia Britannica, 9th edition, vol. iii, Rev. A. H. Sayce, M. A., Fellow and Tutor of Queen’s College, Oxford, in an article, “Babylonia,” in speaking of the Chaldeans, Assyrians, and Babylonians, at about B. C. 2200 (page 191) says, “The week of seven days was in use from an early period; indeed, the names which we still give to the days, can be traced to ancient Babylonia; and the seventh day was one of Shabum, or ‘rest.’” And the same learned divine quotes from the “clay tablets, or books,” of B. C. 2000, parts of hymns to the gods, which resemble the Hebrew psalms “in substance and form;” showing that the Hebrews brought their Sabbath, and much of their religion, from Chaldea, as early as B. C. 2000. And when we remember that this record reaches back to within about 300 years of the deluge, of which these ancient Babylonian “clay tablets,” or books, give a clear account, as well as of creation, corresponding with that of Moses in the Hebrew Scriptures, we may safely conclude that the seventh-day Sabbath was generally, if not universally observed, not only in antediluvian times, but also in the early post-diluvian times. And hence we may understand why the fourth commandment commenced with the word “remember;” every branch of the human family, in all the remote ages, having understood the weekly division of time of seven days, and generally, if not universally, observing or recognizing the seventh as a Sabbath, or day of rest, and so requiring to be reminded of it, as God’s “holy Sabbath,” and man’s day of rest.
This accounts for the fact of there being in the Arabic language no other name for the seventh day but Sabbath; the same is true of the Italian, and the French name indicates as much. It also corresponds with the fact that the seventh day was observed in the British Isles till after the Roman conquest, as stated by Burnside; and as proved by the fact that in the English Common Law, no Sabbath is known but the seventh day, Sunday being sustained only by more recent statute law; the British Parliament never sitting on the seventh day, nor on Friday evening after six o’clock, from ancient custom, I believe, and in accordance with ancient law. And it is a notorious fact, that the Abyssinians, who were never brought under the Roman power, always did, and still do, observe the seventh day as the Sabbath. But wherever the Roman power and influence were felt, after the Edict of Constantine, A. D. 321, (see Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, article Lord’s day) their influence has been to substitute Sunday for the Sabbath. And so we find that, as the Romans overran most of the world, sending their influence even further than their conquests, Sunday became quite generally substituted among the nations for the ancient and God-appointed Sabbath. The Roman church adopted it, not as a divinely appointed day, but as an institution of their church, as I was assured by a learned English divine and dignitary of that faith, with whom I spent a Sunday, visiting Versailles in France, a few years since. The Nestorians, who went out from them, returned to the original Sabbath, as proved by a marble tablet recently dug up in China, containing a synopsis of their faith. (Ten Great Religions.) Many others, Luther, Knox, and others of the early Protestants, have held on to Sunday with only a very feeble grasp. And it must be admitted, that the Roman church justly charges Protestants with an inconsistency in observing Sunday, the day of its own appointment, while at the same time denying that the church has a divine right to abolish the Sabbath, and substitute another day of rest. It appears that Sunday was first appointed by the Roman emperor, perhaps partly from the influence of the Northern Barbarians, who overran the empire, and who worshiped the sun on that day, although probably not regarding it as the Sabbath. Sunday observance also grew, in part, from the practice of Christians’ celebrating on that day the resurrection of Christ, and perhaps a dislike to the Jews further helped it on. The change was made, however, on the supposition that the emperor and the church had such a right to change; and Protestants, denying that right, are inconsistent with themselves in the observance of their Sunday.
As to the impossibility of keeping the seventh day, in all the habitable parts of the world, the Hebrews settle the matter, by a practice evidently reaching back far anterior to the time when Abraham visited Egypt, B. C. 1920 years. As to the seventh-part-of-time plea, it is of man, not of God, as all days might thus be kept, producing confusion doubly confounded. And, finally, as to its making no difference what day is kept, that may be true, in a sense, to those who are to be finally lost; but those who have been made partakers of the divine nature, being heirs of God, in order to be consistent, feel at home, and not have to change on reaching Heaven, should keep the Sabbath that God does. For, “Verily my Sabbaths ye shall keep” (Ex. 31:13), saith the Lord, showing that God keeps the seventh day, as he does all other divine commands. —E. R. M., in Sabbath Recorder.

THE SHEEP OF DEATH.

By Expositor

In the 49th psalm there is one lesson which even the most cursory reader need not miss; viz., the vanity of mere wealth. The whole psalm pours contempt on wealth, pursues it with most incisive and biting irony. Its pictures of the man who devotes his whole life to amassing a treasure, of which, when he takes the inevitable journey of death, he cannot carry so much as a single shekel with him; of the man who calls his lands after his own name, as if to cheat death itself and to secure a bastard immortality, perpetuating his name on earth while he himself perishes in hades; and of the man who thinks it possible to bribe death, and buy the power “to live on forever,” are quick with a scorn beyond that of satire. They tremble with a fervid moral indignation and contempt for the folly which can mistake wealth for man’s chief good. Wealth is not man’s chief good; it is wrong and wicked, it is a profound and fatal violation of the divine law and order, to make it the governing and supreme aim of life. For all who do that, even though they violate no human law, and even though they acquire but little of the wealth they seek, the psalmist cherishes a pure unutterable scorn. To him, they are losing the very form and status of men. They are flinging away their divine birthright for a mess of pottage. They are sinking to the level of “the beasts that perish” (verses 10, 12, 14, 20, by their repetitions, show how strongly this thought had seized the poet’s mind); i. e., they are living as if they had no life but this, as if death were not, as if there were no land of light beyond the grave.
But there is one picture of them, still hidden from us by a thin veil of words, in which his scorn for these brutish persons culminates in a figure as terrible, perhaps, as any in the whole range of Scripture. In verse 14 he depicts them as “the sheep of death.” The opening clauses of the verse, rightly translated, run: “Like sheep they are gathered to hades; death is their shepherd” (he who feeds or finds pasture for them; not he who “feeds on them”). What the psalmist means is, that men who make wealth their ruling aim are not simply like the beasts that perish, but are in very deed the sheep of death; that it is death whom they have chosen for their shepherd, instead of God, the author and source of life, that it is death who finds pasture for them while they live, and who, when they die, drives them to his fold. Think of it! “The Sheep of Death,” men following that grim shadow to the darkness in which it dwells! and these the very men who “bless their souls” (verse 18), whom the world praises because they have done good to themselves, whose sayings the world quotes and approves after they have gone to their long dark home.
Was there ever a more grisly and dreadful metaphor? And yet is it one whit too dreadful? Is it not true that every man who trusts in riches, or longs for them, as his chief good, is pursuing death, not life, has taken for his shepherd “the dark shadow feared of man,” although he knows it not! Can we not see in that very trust or longing the very brand of death, the private and distinctive mark of that grim shepherd?
Man was not made to find the chief good and market of his time in gain, in growing rich, in founding families, and calling lands after his own name. And any man who puts that first which God did not mean to be first, so far forfeits his life, so far comes under the dominion of death; for what is death save the subversion of the true order of life? We truly live only as we fulfill the law of our being, as we live for what God meant us to live, and as he meant us to live. So far as we fall short of that, God ceases to be our shepherd; and of our own will and choice we become the “sheep of death.”
The Sheep of Death! Who could not resent the name, if it were applied to him? Go to any rich man rejoicing in his gain; tell him that on his stately mansion, his broad fields, his prosperous speculations, his accumulated treasures, there is hidden the fatal mark which proves him to be of the flock of death; and however wholly he may be living to himself, however little he may be doing for others, and though in comparison with wealth he despise wisdom, genius, righteousness, and would part with them all, if he had them, rather than lose his chief treasure, yet would he not be sincerely shocked, would he not indignantly resent the imputation, if at least he did not account you the “fool” which the psalmist calls him? And yet, after all, what has he acquired? what is he living for, that will outlast death? what that he can carry beyond the “bourne”? To live in and for the perishable, is not that to perish?
Little or much, what does it matter? If a man could inherit or acquire the whole realm of nature, or if he be content with a few houses and fields, or a few hundreds a year and what these will bring him, so long as he can be content to move within the limits of time and sense, and makes no provision for the spirit that is in him, or the eternity through which that spirit may endure, he is equally the bond-slave of death. So long as he sows to the flesh, whether on a larger or a smaller scale, he can only reap the inevitable harvest of corruption. He is of those of whom it is written, “Like sheep they are gathered into hades; for death is their shepherd.”—Expositor.

NEWS FROM THE UNSEEN.

We have seen floating about among our Exchanges a scrap of news pertaining to the reception of Pope Pius Ninth in the celestial world. Thus it is said:—
“We are gravely assured on the authority of Le Pelerin, a Catholic paper, not only of the safe arrival of the late incumbent of the pontifical throne in Paradise, but of several particulars in regard to the honors of which he was the recipient upon his entrance into that blessed state.
“The paper referred to says: ‘Upon entering Paradise he received a crown from the hands of the Immaculate Virgin Mary, as a reward for the crown he had conferred on her while on earth.
“‘St. Joseph, whom he had made the patron and protector of the church, did not fail to shake him cordially by the hand, and thank him.
“‘On seeing him enter, St. Peter instantly gave the pitch, and the heavenly choir struck up.
“‘Florins, Francis de Sales, and Alphonse de Ligouri, whom he had proclaimed doctors of the church, extolled each in turn the exploits and achievements of his pontificate.
“‘Fifty-two Saints and twenty-six Blesseds, who owe to Pius Ninth their existing position, regaled him with melodious concerts.’”
We have noted the somewhat incredulous tone in which papers have commented on this remarkable information, and we have been led to inquire what there is about this so incredible. Have we not repeatedly heard ministers, eminent, able and orthodox, who have reported things as wonderful as these? Have they not sung of their friends who are watching and waiting for them at the beautiful gate? Have they not preached that those who had departed this life had been welcomed by their friends to celestial joys? Have they not told how mothers, looking over the battlements of Heaven, have watched their children in their homeward way as they drew near? Has not this been the warp and woof of a thousand funeral sermons? And if our Protestant brethren so clearly discern the mysteries of the unseen, is it surprising that the Romish hierarchy have similar glimpses of the great beyond?
To be sure it is possible that there may be no Scripture to prove that Pope Pius Ninth was thus received by angel choirs and with apostolic welcomes, but is there not quite as much Scripture for this as for a hundred other statements which men are making from the pulpit from day to day? In fact, if we come down to the simple ministry of the word of God, we shall find that the wings of fancy will be astonishingly reduced in length and spread. We can get more information on these subjects from many a minister in one sermon, than can be derived from all our Saviour’s teachings as recorded in the New Testament.
We suggest whether, on such themes as these, it might not be well to leave these vague fancyings, and cultivate that modesty and reticence which was characteristic of our Lord. We know that Lazarus died and was buried and rose, but on his return to life he made no mention of such scenes as these to which we have referred. We know that our Lord Jesus died and was buried, but we also know that when he burst the grave and returned to life, it was not to gratify our curiosity with any wondrous tales concerning death and its mysteries. The safest preaching is preaching the Word, and if he had many things to teach us which he withheld, we, in this respect, may safely follow his example.—The Christian.
Continue reading: PEACE ON EARTH