Earlier text: A SPIRIT OF SACRIFICEWhat we Need.
By Josephine Mott
We need true men and women, those who will not shrink, or yield one iota when the truth is at stake, those who fear nothing so much as violating their own consciences and displeasing God, such as Eld. D. E. Maxson spoke of in his essay before the S. D. Baptist Conference at West Hallock, Sept. 12, 1872, “We want the most manly men, and the most womanly women, to stand in our pulpits.” Every one who loves the Sabbath of the Lord and his holy word must most heartily respond to this sentiment. And not only in the pulpit do we need them, but everywhere. How shall we obtain them? By training our youth to be truthful, honest, and faithful. We must educate them morally, religiously, and intellectually. Educate them to avoid every appearance of evil, to despise anything that looks like trickery or dishonesty, teach them always to be in earnest, always to say what they mean and mean what they say. Trickery and corruption run riot through the land without check, and, to oppose it, we need those who will not swerve a hair's breadth for ridicule, opposition, or persecution, in whatever form it may come; those who have the moral stamina to breast the storm, from whatever quarter it may come, trusting in the strength of God and not their own, holding fast the truth in its integrity, holding it up to men as the beacon light to lead them to light and life, feeling the burden of souls laid upon their hearts, and that they must give an account to the Searcher of hearts for the talents entrusted to them, feeling that God has given them a work to do which they and they alone can do. All must work; but all have not the same work. It is the symmetry of the parts that makes the whole body beautiful. All are members of one body and if we would have the body glorious and beautiful, we must have the members beautiful. If there is anything deformed and dwarfed in the natural body, it excites a feeling of repulsiveness in the mind. So if there is anything sinful and wrong in any of the members of this body, the world will see it, and say that it is not what it professes to be, and will become disgusted. So the members should strive to exemplify the life of Christ in all their doings. He is the only perfect pattern whereby true womanly women and manly men can be made. So let us all strive to attain to that degree of perfection by following his example as shall cause the whole body to be symmetrical and beautiful, and show to the world around us that we are indeed born of God, by the love we show to each other and the world, remembering the words of the beloved apostle, “My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue, but in deed and in truth.” The Loan and the Republic.
The extraordinary success of the French loan has a marked political, as well as financial, significance. It shows that France is regaining her former position in the family of nations, and that capitalists, the most sensitive of animals, have recovered their confidence in her health and longevity. A loan is for a nation what a policy of life-insurance is for an individual. The one, as well as the other, is calculated on the expectation of life of the party insured. If a loan had been solicited eighteen months ago, just after the fierce crisis of the war was over, and while France was yet in the agony of Communism, the sequela or dregs of that febrile access, the proposition would have been received with ridicule, and the result, if any there had been, loaded with onerous and humiliating terms. The loan is, in fact, the recognition of the French Republic by the powers behind thrones mightier than the thrones themselves. When the capitalists of Germany itself—of Berlin, of Frankfort, of Cologne—eagerly asked leave to lend many millions to their conquered enemy, it was the surest of proofs that, though conquered, they were sure that she was not destroyed. When England, Belgium, Holland, and Switzerland, competed with France herself for the privilege of investing their funds in the good faith of the Republic, it were of no consequence if the principalities and powers that predominate over those countries had refused to acknowledge its existence. Even the cities which had been ravished from the domain of France by the conqueror—such as Strasbourg, Mulhouse, and Metz—ask to be allowed to contribute toward the redemption of the soil of what they still esteem their mother country. All this goes to show that the credit of France, which is the breath of the nostrils of a nation, is still sound, though she has exchanged the pinchbeck trappings of imperialism for the simpler robes of a republic. Much of this renewal of confidence in the credit of France is due to the great statesman whom Providence has raised up in the extremity of France, as was Lincoln at the turning-point of our own destinies. He has pursued the wise and sagacious policy of strict honesty in his administration of affairs. The polity intrusted to his charge was not the one he would have preferred, could he have had the absolute direction of the form of government to be adopted by his country. He is by nature and conviction a believer in a constitutional monarchy, and holds that a hereditary executive gives a steadiness to the workings of a government which the agitations attendant on an elective one would be very apt to disturb, especially in a people so mercurial as the French, while the responsibility of ministers to the legislature would secure the ultimate prevalence of the deliberate will of the nation. And it was, doubtless, the knowledge of these, his opinions, that induced the majority of the Assembly, which was strongly monarchical, to elect him President of the Republic. They hoped that he would make the Republic a bridge to the Monarchy, and would bring back the Bourbons, as Monk did the Stuarts. Fortunately, the advocates of the elder and the younger branches could not agree on the monarch; for, if they had, they could have proclaimed him by a majority vote, which would have been the certain signal of a renewed civil war. They feared to take the responsibility and the risk of such a measure, and trusted that events, guided by a former minister of Louis Phillippe, would bring about the desired Restoration. But M. Thiers had received the Republic in his charge, and he felt himself bound in honor to surrender it intact into the hands of the nation, when the nation was ready to pass upon its future form of government. The monarchical party has been losing prestige and influence in the nation, from the first. Their obvious wish to juggle the Monarchy into existence by some political legerdemain, has shaken whatever confidence a considerable proportion of the French people was inclined to place in them. These partisans of theirs desired a monarchy, in the faith that it would establish peace and a permanent form of government, quite as much as from any belief in divine right. But when the delegates of the Right and the Right Center expostulated with M. Thiers, on the 20th of June, for not resorting to the tricks of imperialism, and using the power of the government to influence elections by official nominations and otherwise, the truly conservative part of the nation saw that they were actuated by personal ambitions and dynastic prejudices, rather than by intelligent patriotism. The majority of the Assembly have it in their power to depose M. Thiers at any moment—a power which they dare not use. On the contrary, by the power of resignation which he holds, he virtually controls its legislation, and has compelled consent to his own financial policy, to which the majority at both ends of the Chamber were strongly opposed. He has kept the peace, suppressed disturbances, executed justice, and given to the nation the repose which is its greatest need. It is this fact which gives him his hold on his own countrymen, and gives to his country the confidence on the part of other nations of which the success of the loan is a most signal proof. His own and foreign nations are content to leave the direction of affairs in his hands until the time is fully arrived for a truly Constituent Assembly, answering to our Constitutional Conventions. When this body meets, we may be very sure that no form of monarchy will proceed forth from it. Bourbonism will have as little chance as Bonapartism itself in it. We may hope that the Monarchists, seeing the hopelessness of their cause, will unite with the moderate Republicans in the establishment of a genuine republic, which will protect persons and property, keep the peace at home and abroad, and give their country the season of rest necessary to repair its forces. If the French can but learn that a republic means the government of the majority, however small, and the submission of the minority, however large, and that tranquillity, and not agitation, is its object, France may recover her rank among the nations of Europe, and her example be more dangerous to crowned heads than her arms ever were. Rest from the world, how sweet!
From noise of rushing feet,
From striving hands of selfishness and sin:
Rest from the ceaseless war
Of States and sects ajar,
Truth drowned by falsehood in perpetual din. Rest for the weary thought,
Which knows not whom it ought,
Still lured astray, to follow or to shun;
Rest for the struggling will,
Battling its inward ill
With fruitless toil, forevermore begun. Rest for the wounded heart!
In grief it hugs apart,
Ungues sed by all,—by mortal eyes unseen!
Rest for the hungering soul!
Now hath she reached her goal,
God's Heaven on earth,—Eternal and Serene. Christian Unity.
By M. Wood
WHAT is it that divides and separates the true family of Christ, if it is not the remaining corruption of our nature, the remaining darkness of our mind, and the subtle enemy of our soul? It is these foes which disturb the peace of the church, and destroy much of her purity and spiritual prosperity. When the Holy Spirit comes in to revive us, and purge away the old leaven of malice and wickedness, and fill us with love, sincerity, and truth, and cause us to die to self, and live to Jesus, our Saviour, our principles are then new. We act from pure, holy, disinterested motives. Faith, working by love, is the moving principle. Self is no longer the pivot on which we turn, but Jesus is our all in all. We live no longer according to the sinful customs of the world, or the powerful solicitations of the flesh, but according to God's holy precepts. We delight in the law of God. It is our meat and drink. We dedicate ourselves, and all we have, to the service of our divine Lord and Saviour who loved us, and gave himself for us. Then we shall not be daily occupied in forming plans for worldly pleasure, or projecting schemes for the acquisition of worldly profit, but in devising ways and means for carrying on the cause of truth, and for a general spreading of the third angel's message. When we die to self, and have the love of God deep in our hearts, then, and not till then, need we expect to become bright and shining lights in the world, and advance, as it ought to be advanced, the cause of present truth. Bearing Wrongs Rather Than Avenging Them
It costs more to avenge wrongs than to bear them. Walking by Faith, Not Feeling
One class of Christians are always measuring their progress by their feelings. If they feel well and happy they are satisfied that all is well, and that they are in the right path—Heaven is sure. If trials, temptations, and sorrows come, then they are cast down and discouraged. These do not walk by faith, but by feeling. ACCORDING to Luke's account of the crucifixion of our Saviour, Luke 23: 27–46, one of the two malefactors who were crucified with him, said to Jesus, “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise.” Verses 42, 43. This, says the immaterialist, “must ever stand as a clear announcement of the uninterrupted immortality of the soul.” Landis, p. 211. The “clear announcement” is made out in this manner: Christ and the thief, it is claimed, both died that day; they both went to paradise that day; and their condition while there was, of course, one of consciousness and intelligence. There is one fact which stands somewhat in the way of this clear announcement; and that is, that Christ did not go to paradise that day. In answer to the popular view we first set forth this unqualified proposition, and undertake its proof; and if this shall prove to be well grounded, the doctrine of annihilationism will be found in a degree true; for the claims usually built on the scripture above quoted are utterly and forever annihilated by this fact. In entering upon the argument to show that Christ did not go to paradise that day, we first inquire what paradise is, and where it is. The word occurs but three times in the English version of the Scriptures, all in the New Testament; two besides the verse under consideration; but these are amply sufficient to define and locate it. First, Paul in 2 Cor. 12: 2 says: I knew a man in Christ about fourteen years ago, (whether in the body I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell; God knoweth,) such an one caught up to the third heaven. In verse 4 he affirms that the place to which this man was caught up was paradise. This establishes the fact that paradise is in the third heaven. Again, in Rev. 2: 7 we read the promise which the Saviour gives to the overcomers; and he says: “To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life which is in the midst of the paradise of God.” This establishes another equally important fact, that paradise is where the tree of life now is. Now if the Scriptures anywhere give us any further information respecting the place where the tree of life is to be found, we have still further testimony respecting paradise. In Rev. 21 and 22, we have a description of the New Jerusalem, the holy city which is above. In chap. 22: 1, 2, we read: “And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the midst of the street of it [the city] and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruit, and yielded her fruit every month.” By this testimony, we learn that the tree of life, which grows in the midst of the paradise of God, is in the holy city, fast by the river of life, which proceeds from the throne of God. Nothing could be more explicit than this. We have now found the paradise of the New Testament. It is in the third heaven, where the tree of life is, and where God maintains his residence and his throne. Whoever therefore goes into paradise goes into the presence of God. If the Saviour went there on the day of his crucifixion, with the impenitent thief, he went into the presence of his Father. Now let us reverently listen to the words of the Lord and believe what he says, while he himself testifies whether he went to paradise on the day of his crucifixion, or not. On the morning of his resurrection, the third day after his crucifixion, he said to Mary, who was about to embrace his feet, in accordance with the ancient custom of deference or worship, “Touch me not; FOR I AM NOT YET ASCENDED TO MY FATHER.” The third day, remember, from the crucifixion, and not ascended into paradise yet! Struck into a state of bewilderment by this stunning fact, Landis, pp. 209, 211, clutches wildly for some supports by which to rear again his prostrate structure. He feigns to find evidence in John 16: 16 that Jesus told his disciples that at death he would go to his Father: a scripture which very evidently has reference not to his death but to his bodily ascension, forty days after his resurrection. Then, referring to the fact that the word “ascend” is from anabaino, he says: “Now every tyro knows that in composition ana has very frequently [?] the force of again. Baino alone means simply to ascend; ana adds a shade of meaning.” It is frequently the case that writers try to drive others into an admission of their statements by representing that they will appear very ignorant and stupid to deny them. But Mr. L., not being a tyro, doubtless understands that nearly every statement in this criticism is false in itself considered, and every one of them wholly so, as applied to the case in hand. Ana in composition with baino, does not have the force of again. In neither Liddell and Scott, Robinson, Greenfield nor Parkhurst is there any such definition as “ascend again” given to anabaino. Baino alone does not mean “to ascend.” No such definition is given to it in the standard authorities here named. It means simply to go, without any reference to the direction; other words either in composition with it, or in the context, signifying whether this motion is up or down, forward or backward, over or under, &c. In no one of the eighty-one instances of the use of the word in the New Testament, is it translated “ascend again.” And finally those texts which Mr. L. quotes as containing the word again, as Matt. 3: 16, which he quotes “Christ went up again, or returned,” and Matt. 5: 1, which he quotes, “He went up again into a mountain,” the word, again, is not expressed in the English nor implied in the Greek. In only one instance is the word again used with anabaino; that is Gal. 2: 1, where Paul says, “I went up again to Jerusalem;” but here the word again is from another word (palin), and anabaino is translated simply, “went up.” Rarely do we meet with an instance of more reckless desperation in the line of criticism. And what is the object of it? It is to have us understand that when Christ says, “I am not yet ascended to my Father,” he means to say, I am not yet ascended again to my Father. And from this he would have us further draw the lucid inference that Christ had ascended once, that is, in his disembodied spirit, between his death and resurrection, and now tells Mary not to touch him because he has not ascended again! It would be difficult to conceive of a more unnecessary and far-fetched inference. And that men will seriously contend for such a view, shows the orbless obstinacy with which they will cling to preconceived notions, though they have only the most groundless trifles to sustain them, rather than surrender them for more consistent views. Nothing can be more evident than that Christ when he said, “I am not yet ascended to my Father,” affirmed in the most direct manner that since his advent into this world, he had not, up to that time ascended to his Father. Rather than thus summarily lose the argument that the thief was still conscious in death, and that the soul is therefore (?) immortal, another attempt is made to adjust the matter thus: Although Christ did not go to his Father, he nevertheless went to paradise, which is not where the Father dwells, but the intermediate resting place of departed souls. Do we then understand them? We found them a little while ago, arguing from Eccl. 12: 7 that the disembodied spirit did return to God; which they claimed to be proof positive that the soul is immortal; and thought it would puzzle the annihilationists not a little. Do they now give this up, and admit that the soul or spirit does not go to God, but only into some intermediate place, called paradise? It matters not to us which position they take, only we wish to know which one it is. We cannot hold our peace and allow them to take one position on one text and another on another, to avoid the embarrassments into which their theory plunges at every turn. That paradise is no intermediate state, a half way house between the grave and the resurrection, we have fully shown; for we have the positive statements of the Scriptures to show that paradise is in the third heaven, where God sits upon his throne; and Christ told Mary the third day after his crucifixion, in so many words, that he had not yet ascended there. The popular interpretation of Christ's language to the thief thus utterly failing, we are thrown back upon the text for some other explanation of the phraseology there used: “Verily I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise.” There are but two probable ways in which this language can be explained: One is, to let the phrase “to-day” refer to the time to which the thief had reference in his request. He said, “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.” He looked forward to the day when Christ should come into his kingdom. And if the “to-day” in Christ's answer refers to this time, then the sense would be, “Verily, I say unto thee, To-day, or this day, the day to which you refer when I come into my kingdom, thou shalt be with me in paradise.” The word, to-day, is from the Greek σήμερον (semeron); and all the definitions we find of it would seem to confine it to present time, excluding an application of it to the future. This interpretation, therefore, we think cannot be urged. The other, and only remaining method of interpreting the passage, is to place the comma after “to-day,” making to-day an adverb qualifying say. The sense would then be, Verily I say unto thee to-day, thou shalt be with me in paradise, at that period in the future when I shall come in my kingdom. This method of punctuation, if it is allowable, clears the subject of all difficulty. Let us then candidly consider what objections can be urged against it. As to the punctuation itself, we all know that that is not the work of inspiration, and withal that it is of recent origin, the comma in its present form not having been invented till the year A. D. 1790. It is therefore allowable to change this in any manner that the sense of the passage, the context, or even other portions of the Scriptures may demand. And in support of this punctuation, we have the example of some Greek manuscripts, which, according to Griesbach, place the comma after “to-day” in this declaration. But the objector accuses us of making sad nonsense of the text by this change; and he asks in bitter irony, “Didn't the thief know it was that day, without Christ's telling him?” Very true, as a matter of fact; but let the objector beware, lest his sarcasm fall upon the Scriptures themselves; for such very expressions do occur therein. See Zech. 9: 12: “Turn you to the stronghold, ye prisoners of hope: even to-day do I declare that I will render double unto thee.” Transposing this sentence, without altering the sense, we have phraseology similar to that of Luke 23: 43; namely; “I declare unto you even to-day, I will render double unto thee.” The events threatened here were to take place in the future, when the Lord should bend Judah, &c. See context. So the phrase, “to-day,” could not qualify the “rendering double,” &c., but only the declaration. Here, then, is an expression exactly parallel with that in Luke, and the same irony is applicable; thus, “Did not the prisoners of hope know it was that day when the declaration was made to them?” But let our opponents now discard their unworthy weapon; for here it is leveled against the words of Inspiration itself. But when we take into consideration the circumstances of the case, we see a force and propriety in the Saviour's making his declaration emphatically upon that day. He had been preaching the advent of the kingdom of heaven to listening multitudes. A kingdom, he had promised to his followers. But the powers of death and darkness had apparently triumphed, and were crushing into the very grave both his prospects and his promises. He who was expected to be the king of the coming kingdom, stretched upon the shameful cross, was expiring in ignominy and reproach; his disciples were scattered; and where now was the prospect of that kingdom which had been preached and promised? But amid the supernatural influences at work upon that memorable day, a ray of divine illumination may have flashed in upon the soul of the poor thief, traveling the same road of death beside his Lord. A conviction of the truthfulness of his claims as the Messiah, the Son of God, may have fastened upon his mind, and a desire have sprung up in his heart to trust his lot in his hands, leading him to put up a humble and sincere petition, Lord, in mercy remember me when the days of thy triumph and glory shall come. Yes, says the suffering Saviour, in the hearing of the mocking multitude, I say unto thee, to-day—to-day, in this hour of my darkness and agony—to-day, when the fatal cross is apparently giving the lie to all my pretensions —to-day, a day of forlorn prospects and withered hopes, so far as human eyes can see—verily, to-day, I say unto thee, thou shalt be with me in paradise, when my kingdom shall be established in triumph and glory. Thus, there is a divine force and beauty in these words of our Lord, as uttered on that occasion. How like a sun at midnight would they have broken in upon the gloom that enshrouded the sorrowing hearts of the disciples, had they fathomed their import. For who had occasion to sink in despair, if not he upon whom all depended, and that, too, when expiring under the agonies of the cross. But lo! no cloud of gloom is sufficient to fix its shadows upon his serene brow. His divine foresight, riding calmly over the events of the present, fixes itself upon that coming period of glory, when he shall see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied. There in the hour of his deepest humility, he points them to the joys of paradise. Thus, by a simple removal of the comma one word forward, the stone of stumbling is taken out of this text, by making it harmonize with other Scriptures; and thus, the promise, by having reference to something in the future, and not to anything to be performed on that day, contains no affirmation of consciousness in death. Ministerial Labor.
By James White
With feelings of tenderest love to all our fellow-laborers, and to all interested in the cause, we wish to say some plain things. During the spring, and the summer just past, we have been separated from the work in consequence of constant hard labor, and wearing care, and have had a good opportunity for reflection, and to observe the workings of the cause. The intelligence brought to us by the REVIEW of the triumph of the truth in different parts of the field, especially that resulting from tent labor, has cheered and comforted us beyond expression. And one important feature to which we call attention with great pleasure is, that the success has not so much depended upon ability, and on years of experience, as earnest labor and humble trust in God to move the minds and hearts of the people. Those who watch the providence of God in the workings of the cause will not fail to be instructed by many important lessons. And it should be a matter of the greatest encouragement to young men who feel called to give themselves to the ministry of the word to see that God is taking striplings to accomplish the greatest amount of good. Maine has been calling for help. She has needed help, and has had much help from our most efficient laborers. And had it not been for the poisonous influence of certain men in Maine who had been in the ministry a score of years, and who came in among us with a feeling that their experience in the ministry had qualified them to lead off in the cause, the membership and real strength in Maine might be fourfold what it now is. In fact, very much of the most efficient labor in Maine for the past few years has been to counteract the miserable, scattering influence of certain ministers in the State. Maine is a good field of labor. And we have been very much cheered in reading the accounts of the success of Brn. Goodrich and Blaisdell with the tent. And there are others in Maine, who, if they will take hold of the work with a teachable spirit, will also see the hand of God working with them, and souls being rescued from the darkness and errors of this time. We were very much encouraged for the New York Conference in reading of the interest attending the labors of Brn. Reynolds and Saunders with the tent. These men, comparatively young in the cause, can be strong in God, if they are humble, and may prove a great blessing to the cause in that State. Michigan seems to be a field of deep interest. Michigan has liberally sent her most efficient ministers east and west and south, and has been for several years almost destitute of laborers. But this State has the present season had two tent companies in the field, which have labored with unparalleled success. And it is a fact that, with the exception of Eld. Van Horn, these laborers have been young men, striplings in the cause, several of them unordained. It is with pleasure that we mention the names of Lamson, E. B. and S. H. Lane, and Kenyon. There is room in Michigan for125 twenty-five more just such earnest, common sense, young men to go forth, armed with the word of God, to fight the battles for truth. God grant that these dear young men may always seek to work in him, keep near to the dear Saviour, and in hope and faith press the battle. If God be on their side, victory will be sure. Then He that will be for them will be more than all that can be against them. God is a majority. Men are feeble. God is mighty. What an unspeakable blessing and honor to feeble men to be clothed with the strength of God, and to work in him. We have been exceedingly glad to see young men pressing into the ministry in the western Conferences. And it should encourage them to learn that God is working through just such feeble instruments as themselves. The reports from brethren Kilgore, Morrison, Downer, and others, have moved our feelings deeply. And what has touched the tenderest cord has been the fact that these are striplings in the cause that have been witnessing the gracious work of God so gloriously. Tremblingly they went forth. And, not having a great amount of experience in the ministry to lean upon, they cast themselves in their weakness upon the arm of the mighty God of Jacob, and have found help and strength. To us, this is the most favorable feature of the cause at the present time. We wish to speak of Iowa in particular. For good reasons we have ever sympathized with and loved the brethren in that State. We have encouraged our best Michigan gifts to that State in times of Iowa’s past misfortunes and feebleness. And when we saw that Conference comparatively strong, and other States in destitution and great want of ministerial labor, we were as ready to plead for these destitute States as we have been for Iowa in her destitution. Our efforts were not appreciated. And our remarks upon the subject at General Conference, suggesting that the growth of a sectional feeling in Iowa would be ungrateful and wrong, were misunderstood, and made a bad use of. In that Conference were two strong men, Elds. Butler and Carrigh. The membership of that Conference looked to these men to do the work, and overlooked, to some extent, at least, the importance of encouraging others to enter the ministry. But God has taken this matter in hand, and has worked it out to the glory of his name. Our camp-meeting in that State was the best ever held there. With Bro. Carrigh in Minnesota, and Bro. Butler filling the office of President of General Conference, to labor in the wide field, the brethren of that Conference, at that camp-meeting, came up nobly. There we saw worked out what we had seen in prospect when we made remarks in General Conference, to which exceptions had been taken. God gave us a testimony at that camp-meeting that moved hearts, and inspired faith. And it was one of the most solemn and happy hours of our ministry when we saw bowed in a half circle in front of the preachers’ stand, Brn. Hare, Mitchel, Nicola, Kilgore, Morrison, and Osborn, of that Conference to receive ordination to the work of the ministry by the laying on of hands. While we pen these words we feel the tenderest Christian sympathy drawing these brethren to our heart, and tears blind our sight. O God, keep these men pure in thy sight, and make them strong in thee. And then how touching to the feelings of one who entered the ministry in his school-boy days, and has known much of the toils, trials, and blessedness of such a life for thirty years, to see some eight or ten of the young men of the Iowa Conference pressing into the ranks of the licentiates of that Conference, just vacated by six who had received ordination. True, we were very feeble at the time of that good camp-meeting, and probably labored beyond our strength; but the place, especially at the closing services, seemed sacred, and the scene one of those where awful solemnity and holy delight were wonderfully and inexpressibly mingled. To those who can understand the words, will the truest idea be conveyed when we say that the Lord was in the place. Feeling the importance of the occasion, and the presence and power of God in every nerve, how could we keep from the appropriate labors of the occasion? But in contrast with the pleasing view we have taken of the progress of the cause under the labors of our young men, we look with a degree of sadness to the condition of some of the pioneers of the cause, and the want of success that attends their labors generally. Elds. Cornell and Loughborough have some success in California; but small, when compared with that of some of our striplings. Ingraham is past labor, at present. Waggoner, with his superior argumentative powers, and clear sight of truth, is laboring here and there, and not able to report conversions to any considerable amount. And the reports of our good Bro. Carrigh, with all his strength and success in debate, is likely to discourage all Minnesota, unless victory soon turns on the Lord’s side in his labors. We take the liberty to hold up the picture in the truest light possible, that our people may learn the lesson from it designed by Providence. We confess that we are getting tired of these everlasting, tedious, and, said to be, able and deep discussions of plain questions, whether oral or written. God has given us a plain, harmonious and mighty truth to proclaim, and his power and success attends its earnest proclamation in that unadorned simplicity which the common people can understand. It may be duty at times when the truth is assailed by its enemies, to stand in its defense. But the influence of oral discussions in many respects is to be deplored, while real, lasting good does not, by any means, always result from them. We fear the influence of debate upon our two ablest debaters, Cornell and Carrigh. They, being accustomed to move the crowd in the warmth of debate, are becoming disqualified, we fear, to bear up under the discouragements of small congregations, and a lack of interest on the part of the people. Our books, and our preaching, should be such as to meet the wants of the common people. The Sacred Scriptures are given to the people in plain and easy style; and we should be careful to not make obscure, tedious, and doubtful, that which the word of God has stated in clear, brief, and faith-inspiring terms. We suggest that Bro. Andrews, in giving us the Sacred and Secular History of the Sabbath, do not bring before his mind that class of law-abolished men who have rejected the truth of God, and whose hearts are set to oppose the true Sabbath, however plain its perpetuity may be made. Efforts in the preparation of such a work to so meet the objections of the first-day, and no-day, men that they cannot doubt, would greatly injure it for the reading public generally. The Holy Spirit has not given the facts of the Sacred Scriptures in a manner that men cannot doubt. The great truths in God’s word are given sufficiently clear for faith in those who wish to believe, while those who choose to doubt find chance to doubt. God would have us proclaim in books, and from the speaker’s stand, the plain truths of his word in the power of their simplicity. The Holy Spirit will set them home to honest hearts, and they will gladly believe. While those who choose to cavil, and who would be a curse to the cause of truth, should we be able to compel them to believe by very labored arguments, will continue to cavil. The power of the gospel is in its plain, unvarnished, yet sound, primitive simplicity. It is then that the Holy Spirit has room to work. When human sufficiency, learning, and wisdom, monopolizes the business of converting men and women, the Holy Spirit hardly finds room to do anything for the poor sinner. To our fellow-laborers, especially to those who united with us in the work at an early period in the history of the cause, we wish to speak words of encouragement. The Lord is giving us the field. The present truth, or the truth Providence has brought out for our time, is plain, harmonious, and powerful. And God is ready to bless all who will come so near to him that they can receive the anointing of the Holy Spirit, and have their commission and strength renewed. Most of us are worn, some of us fearfully. In God there is help. In him we may work, and finish our course with joy. Courage, brethren! Courage in the Lord! Denver, Col., Sept. 22, 1872. JOS. CLARKE
By JOS. CLARKE.
We should be careful how we reason, and how we decide in our own minds; how we feel toward God, toward our fellow-mortals, and toward ourselves. In this world of sin, and error, and crime, much occurs that is paradoxical, much that is strange, and we must sometimes wait a little before we judge; moral worth may struggle beneath a load we do not understand, and hasty reproof or random shots may hit wide of the mark, or may wound the innocent. We should be careful how we hear, lest we guide the spear intended for another to our own hearts, or that which should wound and destroy our own carnality we may parry off and avoid. Honesty and purity of purpose will stand the test when the glitter of hypocrisy will be held up in its vileness before the universe. No one need fear the truth of the Judge who is to give us our final reward. Only the reality, let us look to this. Do we cherish in our hearts any wrong? Is there any selfishness there? any pride or self-will? any lurking evil? any partiality to our interest or tastes? We cannot dissemble before our Judge. He looks us through and through. Nothing can cover our sin but the pardoning, cleansing blood of Christ. Let us see to it that we do not part with principle, or truth, or innocence. We may part with our sins, and be the gainers by the exchange. We may part with innocence, and lose eternal life. Shall we do this?