Earlier text: THE JUDGMENT:PRE-MILLENNIAL ADVENT.—NO. 6.
By Chas. Beecher
I will offer one more illustration of the indispensableness of the following canons to the successful denial of the pre-millennial advent. Canon I. All passages uniting the advent, resurrection, Judgment, or conflagration, with millennial descriptions, must be spiritualized. Canon II. All passages mentioning these events, without alluding to the millennium, may be taken literally. There is to be a Judgment-day—a literal Judgment-day. However, this may75 distress the Universalist, the Swedenborgian, or the scoffing infidel, or the indifferent scientific theorist; to the Christian it is a matter of solemn joy. “God hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness, by that Man whom he hath ordained.” So every Christian heart would have it. It will be a literal Judgment. Christ, in person, will be present. “The Lord himself shall descend from Heaven.” It will be a great day—the great day of the Lord. So we would have it. Thanks to God for the assurance! Creation is not always to groan. There is to be a winding up. There is to be a last assize. The Judgment shall sit and the books be opened. Concerning this we never feel disposed to cavil. We never think it derogatory to Christ. We leave that to scoffers. To us it is sublimely appropriate that the crucified should be revealed in flaming fire with mighty angels. No matter how small this globe is. No matter what astronomy thinks. No matter what geology is disposed to allow. God Incarnate has seen fit to be crucified here. We can believe him when he says he will here sit a Judge upon the throne of his glory. And yet how strange that we should discover his personal coming to Judgment, before the millennium, to be highly derogatory and incredible; so incredible as that we must needs spiritualize most of the strongest descriptions of such Judgment to be found in the Bible! How is this? What peculiar impropriety is there in Christ’s coming to judgment before the millennium, rather than after? I confess that it has seemed to me as if some of my brethren were secretly opposed to any personal coming to Judgment; so opposed that the only shield to their orthodoxy was found in a millennial respite. Put far away the great day of the Lord, and make it literal as you will. Bring it nigh, so that it shall be possible for us really to do as St. Peter bids us, “Look for, and haste unto his coming,” and then we will none of it. Then we discover its impropriety. We feel and act about it, if near, just as the Universalists feel and act about it anywhere. And thus, as I showed before, we secretly open the way to Universalism. Compare, for example, the two following descriptions of a day of Judgment. Matt. 25.
“WHEN THE SON OF MAN SHALL COME IN HIS GLORY,
“AND ALL THE HOLY ANGELS WITH HIM,
“THEN SHALL HE SIT UPON THE THRONE OF HIS GLORY.”
AND BEFORE HIM
SHALL BE
GATHERED
ALL
NATIONS.
“And he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats.
“Then shall the King say to those on his left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.
“Verily I say unto you, inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these [my brethren], ye did it not to me.”
Matt. 24:29: “Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken.”
Luke 21:28: “And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.” Joel 3.
“The Lord also shall roar out of Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem.
“Thither shall the Lord bring down all his mighty ones.”
“For there [in the Valley of Jehovah’s Judgment] will I sit to judge all the heathen round about.”
“I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the Valley of Jehovah’s Judgment.” “Assemble yourselves, and come, all ye heathen, and gather yourselves together round about.” “Let the heathen be wakened and come up to the Valley of Jehovah’s Judgment.” “Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision, for the day of the Lord is near in the valley of decision.”
“And will plead with them there for my people, and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land.” “Behold I will raise them out of the place where ye have sold them, and will return your recompense upon your own head, but the Lord will be the hope of his people, and the strength of the children of Israel.”
“The sun and the moon shall be darkened, and the stars shall withdraw their shining.” “And the heavens and the earth shall shake.”
“But the Lord will be the hope of his people, and the strength of the children of Israel.” Now I will ask any unprejudiced reader to compare these two descriptions of a day of Judgment, and tell me which is most likely to be literal. Which would you most naturally attempt to spiritualize? turn into an allegory or parable? Would not that be as easily done with the left hand column as the right? How comes it then that this of Matthew has always been treated as the literal Judgment-day, and that of Joel allegorized? For no other reason than that contained in the canons at the head of this article, viz.: It will not do to consider a literal Judgment-day under such connections. . . . A literal Judgment-day here would be too alarming. People would really begin to “look for, and haste unto it.” Which, however it might do for Peter’s intellectual age, is now plainly stupid and in controversion of all hermeneutical law. And this Judgment, moreover, is too obviously followed by the millennium. “So shall ye know that I am the Lord your God dwelling in Zion my holy mountain; then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more, and it shall come to pass in that day that the mountains shall drop down new wine and the hills shall flow with milk,” &c. A vivid millennial picture. To place a literal Judgment here would be too alarming. It might beget some strong excitements. We might be led to imagine that that great advent of our Lord in fire, to Judgment, was really an advent of rational expectation. Hence, it is necessary to spiritualize this passage; to pour some lethean wave upon it, and baptize it into somnolence. As to that of Matt. 25, however, the case is different. There, it is easy to neglect the important item of chronology furnished by Luke 21:24, by which we are brought down to modern times. . . . There, moreover, no allusion being made to any elapsed millennium, it is easy to take one for granted, and so arriving by one long, logical leap, at the end of time, to permit the Judgment to be literal. Thus gotten far enough away, thus safely sequestered behind a millennial mist, and seen through the rosy illusions of a thousand peaceful years—the dire phantom of a great white throne, no longer jars upon the nerves of a sensitive refinement. Polished compromise with worldliness goes on, and asks complacently, “Where is the promise of his coming?”—Chas. Beecher, in Letter to Henry Ward Beecher. TESTIMONY OF EMINENT MEN.
“The natural and most obvious meaning of this passage surely is, that the future residence of the righteous will be this present terraqueous globe, after its entire organized and combustible matter shall have been destroyed, and its whole mass reduced by heat to a liquid state, and then a new economy reared up on its surface, not adapted to sinful, but to sinless, being; and therefore quite different from its present condition—probably more perfect, but still the same earth and surrounding heavens.” “The common opinion is, that entire combustion actually destroys or annihilates matter, because it is thereby dissipated. But the chemist knows that not one particle of matter has ever been thus deprived of existence; that fire only changes the form of matter, but never annihilates it.” Dr. Tholuck, a German Professor, said:— “The glorification of the visible creation is more definitely declared in Rev. 21: 1, although it must be borne in mind that a prophetic vision is there described. Still more definitely do we find the belief of a transformation of the material world declared in 2 Pet. 3: 7–12. The idea that the perfected kingdom of Christ is to be transferred to Heaven, is properly a modern notion. According to Paul and the Revelation of John, the kingdom of God is placed upon earth, in so far as the earth has part in the universal transformation. This exposition has been adopted and defended by most of the oldest commentators: e. g., Chrysostom, Theodoret, Augustine, Luther, Knox, and others. Luther says, in a lively way, ‘God will make not the earth only, but the heavens also, much more beautiful than they are at present. At present, we see the world in its working clothes; but hereafter, it will be arrayed in its Easter and Whitsuntide robes.’” “It is scarcely credible that God should annihilate any of his works, much less so many and so glorious works. It ought not to be believed without the most decisive proof. On the other hand, it is a most animating thought that this visible creation, which sin has marred,—which the polluted breath of men and devils has defiled—and which, by sin, will be reduced to utter ruin,—will be restored by our Jesus,—will arise from its ruins in tenfold splendor, and shine with more illustrious glory than before it was defaced by sin.” “After a laborious and anxious search for light on this interesting subject, I must pronounce the latter to be my decided opinion. And the same, I find, has been the more common opinion of the Christian fathers, of the divines of the Reformation, and of the critics and annotators who have since flourished. I could produce on this side a catalogue of names which would convince you that this has certainly been the common opinion of the Christian church in every age, as it was also of the Jewish.” “If it be the purpose of God that the earth shall be subjected to a total conflagration, we perfectly well know that the instruments of such an event lie close at hand, and wait only the divine volition to burst out in a moment. But that would not be a destruction; it would be a mere change of form, and, no doubt, would be subservient to the most glorious results. ‘We, according to his promise, look for a new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.’” “In the very heart of the chaos, there begins a Genesis of order, beauty, and peace. The old earth shall put off its ashen robes, and array itself in its bridal garments. The world, we are told, shall close as the world began—with Eden. An Eastern morn of beauty shall dawn upon the earth. Nature groans and travails in pain, waiting to be delivered. ‘Natura,’ or nature, about to bring to the birth, shall bring forth a new world. This is the hope of each new year. This is the joyous anticipation of the people of God. ‘We look for new heavens and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness.’” He adds:— “I know that some have tried to establish the conclusion that the new heavens and new earth is merely a descriptive metaphor of blessedness and joy which shall be realized by all the people of God. If there were scriptural texts to prove that it really is thus to be construed, I should be the last to demur to such an interpretation. But when I see the language and the whole tenor of Scripture clearly and unequivocally indicating that the earth we now inhabit is to be restored, that the air we breathe is about to be regenerated, and that nothing is to be consumed in the last flame but that which the devil has introduced, and which man has accepted,—in short, that this world, which God made and pronounced good and beautiful at its first creation, is to be re-made and reconstituted at least as good and beautiful again,—I must adhere to the literal interpretation now so generally adopted. It appears to be most natural, and most readily to present itself to an unprejudiced reader. The apostle Paul evidently anticipated such a creation as this when he said, ‘For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, of which we speak.’ That expression, ‘the world to come,’ is literally the age or dispensation that is to come; and be assured that that dispensation which is to come is to be upon the earth we now inhabit and under the air which we now breathe.” “Thus said the Creator and the Governor of the universe: ‘Behold I make all things new!’—all which are included in that expression of the apostle, ‘a new heaven and a new earth.’ This is the introduction to a far nobler state of things such as it has not yet entered into the heart of man to conceive,—the universal restoration. For ‘we look,’ says the apostle, ‘for new heavens and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness.’” The Messiah “finally, when the present course of the world shall have ended, will abolish even the outward consequences of the fall, the evil which sin has occasioned, and, after the utter extinction of the kingdom of darkness, glorify his kingdom on the renovated earth.” Dr. Knapp, in his “Theology,” said:— “It cannot be thought that what is here said [in 2 Peter, 3d chapter,] respecting the burning of the world is to be understood figuratively, as Wettstein supposes; because the fire is here too directly opposed to the literal water of the flood to be so understood. It is the object of Peter to refute the boast of scoffers, that all things had remained unchanged from the beginning, and that, therefore, no day of Judgment and no end of the world could be expected. And so he says that originally, at the time of the creation, the whole earth was covered and overflowed with water (Gen. 1), and that from hence the dry land appeared; and the same was true at the time of Noah’s flood. But there is yet to come a great fire revolution. The heavens and the earth (the earth with its atmosphere) are reserved, or kept in store, for the fire, until the day of Judgment (verse 10). At that time, the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will be destroyed by fervent heat, and everything upon the earth will be burnt up. The same thing is taught in verse 12. But in verse 13, Peter gives the design of this revolution. It will not be annihilation, but we expect a new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness; that is, an entirely new, altered, and beautiful abode for man, to be built from the ruins of his former dwelling place, as the future habitation of the pious. (Rev. 21: 1.) This will be very much in the same way as a more perfect and immortal body will be reared from the body which we now possess.” “I expect, with Paul, a reparation of all the evils caused by sin, for which he represents the creation as groaning and travailing.” The late Dr. Chalmers of Scotland, in beautiful and eloquent words, says:— “Man, at the first, had for his place this world, and, at the same time, for his privilege, an unclouded fellowship with God, and for his prospect, an immortality, which death was neither to intercept nor put an end to. He was terrestrial in respect to condition, and yet celestial both in respect of character and enjoyments. “The common imagination that we have of paradise on the other side of death, is that of a lofty, aerial region, where the inmates float in ether, or are mysteriously suspended upon nothing; where all the warm and sensible accompaniments, which give such an expression of strength, and life, and coloring, to our present habitation, are attenuated into a sort of spiritual element, that is meager and imperceptible, and utterly uninviting to the eye of mortals here below; where every vestige of materialism is done away, and nothing left but certain unhealthy scenes, that have no power of allurements, and certain unhealthy ecstasies, with which it is felt impossible to sympathize. The holders of this imagination forget all the while that there is no necessary connection between materialism and sin; that the world which we now inhabit had all the solidity and amplitude of its present materialism before sin entered into it; that God, so far on that account from looking slightly upon it, after it had received the last touch of his creating hand, reviewed the earth, and the waters, and the firmament, and all the green herbage, with the living creatures, and the man whom he had raised in dominion over them, and he saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was all very good. “They forget that, on the birth of materialism, when it stood out in the freshness of those glories which the great Architect of nature had impressed upon it, the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy. They forget the appeals that are everywhere made in the Bible to his material workmanship, and how, from the face of these visible heavens, and the garniture of this earth which we tread upon, the greatness and goodness of God are reflected on the view of his worshipers. No, my brethren, the object of the administration we sit under is to extirpate sin, but not to sweep away materialism. By the convulsions of the last day, it may be shaken and broken down from its present arrangement, and thrown into such fitful agitations as that the whole of its existing framework shall fall to pieces; and with a heat so fervent as to melt the most solid elements, may it utterly be dissolved. And thus may the earth again become without form and void, but without one particle of its substance going into annihilation. Out of the ruins of this sacred chaos may another heaven and another earth be made to arise, and a new materialism, with other aspects of magnificence and beauty, emerge from the wreck of this mighty transformation, and the world be peopled, as before, with the varieties of material loveliness, and space be again lighted up into a firmament of material splendor.” The Religious Declension of these Days.
By Uriah Smith
EVIDENCE has been presented in preceding numbers to show that the Reformation is not yet complete; that the great body of Protestant churches retain in their midst many relics of popery; and that a reform is still needed, as is especially evinced by the multitudinous divisions that exist in the Protestant world. This state of division and religious confusion is rightly denominated, Babylon—a term that is used not to express reproach, but to state a fact. The fact cannot be denied; and while that exists, none should object to the use of a term which properly describes it. Instead of objecting to the term, the objection should rather be to that state of things which demands its use. People do not seem to feel sensitive at all over the sad fact that there is such opposition and contradiction of creeds and sentiments in the religious world; but they are very sensitive over the use of that term which inspiration has seen fit to employ to describe it. In due time God instituted a work which was designed to bring order out of all this chaotic confusion, and substitute harmony for discord. This was the grand announcement that the second coming of his Son was drawing near—the message of Rev. 14: 6. By a work symbolized by an angel flying through heaven, and announcing his mission with a loud voice to the people of the land, all the churches of God were called upon to forget their minor differences in the light of this glorious truth, and, leaping over all men-erected division walls, to take their stand together on this new platform. And it would have accomplished the desired end, if it had been heeded. On this point we speak with confidence; for we have a demonstration before us. The church which has been brought out by this, and the associated messages, is able to show that which no other church can present: it shows a body of people harmoniously united on all points of Bible faith, yet composed of persons from almost every civilized nationality on the globe, and from nearly every denomination of believers and unbelievers in the land, not excepting spiritualists, Catholics, and infidels. Here they stand, their faith fused, but not confused, by a Heaven-sent message which overtops in sublimity and importance every other truth for this time. National prejudice and denominational bias are forgotten; and they are fast drawing on to that “unity of the faith,” which is set forth as the highest attainment of the Christian church. What it has done for a few, it would have done for more, on like conditions. No truth can benefit, unless received. The whole aspect of the religious world would have been changed had the announcement of the second coming of Christ in glory been accepted by the churches, and the sound and harmonious principles of interpretation which were discovered by the rising of its light, been adopted by them. But alas! they rejected the message. Pulpit and pew were shut against it. The channel through which God designed that his truth should shine forth to the world, they closed up; so that all that has been done for outside sinners on this question, has been done over their heads, and in the face of their indifference, or, worse still, their open opposition. Those who embraced the doctrine were discountenanced; and though none at first took hold of the work, with any intention of forming a new denomination, or of withdrawing from the churches of which they were members, many soon found themselves in circumstances which made Isa. 66: 5 applicable to their cases. It is estimated that fifty thousand were separated from the churches, either voluntarily, because they could not freely speak forth the joys of their new faith, while retaining their connection, or involuntarily, because they were not allowed to remain, as the result of the Advent movement of 1844. Will the reader now pause and consider what effect follows the rejection of truth, in the case of either individuals or churches. When the fullness of time comes for some good purpose of God to be fulfilled, and he, in his providence, sends forth a proclamation of it, calling upon the people to hear and obey, if they reject the message and disbelieve the truth, in what relation do they thereby place themselves to God? They cut themselves off from his favor; they bar the way to the entrance of his Spirit. It is utterly impossible that it should be otherwise, unless it is a fact that there is no importance to be attached to the truth of God, that we may believe it or not, as may suit our inclination or convenience, and that God looks with the same favor upon its rejection as upon its acceptance. But such a conclusion cannot be entertained a single instant. The rejection of the message of Rev. 14: 6, 7, on the part of the churches, therefore, prepared the way for the second message of verse 8, which announced the declension that must inevitably result from the rejection of the truth. The fall here announced is a moral fall; for (1) it is the result of a certain course of action, and not its penalty. (2) After the fall, Babylon becomes the hold of foul spirits. Rev. 18: 2. (3) The people of God are then called out. (4) After this, the judgments of God, which involve her complete destruction, are visited upon her. Verses 4, 8. This fall, located by the prophecy in the last days, cannot pertain to the Romish mother; for it would be difficult for that apostate organization to present a lower degree of moral degradation, than it has already presented. It must, therefore, pertain to those bodies which have broken away from the papal church, and which, though retaining, as shown last week, the features of the mother church to a sufficient degree to establish the family relation, have, nevertheless, advanced in light and truth, so far as to reach a position from which moral declension is possible. In the message of Rev. 14: 8, we therefore find an explanation of the great religious declension of the present day; and it is the only explanation that can be given. Our Lord brings it to view in Matt. 24: 12, 13, where, speaking of events to transpire just before the end, he said that iniquity should abound, and the love of many should wax cold. Paul said to Timothy that in the last days evil men and seducers should wax worse and worse, 2 Tim. 3: 12; and that eighteen glaring sins should be the chief characteristics of even the professed church of Christ. Verses 4–5. The message under consideration, and 2 Thess. 2: 10, show that all this comes from not receiving into the heart the truth, and cherishing a love therefor. When the doctrine of the soon coming of Christ, as proclaimed especially in 1844, was rejected by the churches, a change in their religious condition at once became apparent. Well-defined and alarming symptoms of a sudden and widespread declension immediately appeared. This was seen and deplored throughout the length and breadth of the land. And the tendency from that day to this has been downward; for, notwithstanding great religious efforts since that time, and in many instances much apparent success, it has not been sufficient to stay the tide of evil rising in the land, which is now admitted to be higher than ever before. Next week we will present the testimony of men who cannot be accused of being either alarmists or croakers, who have borne witness to these lamentable facts. U. S. The Religious Amendment.
By John Harvey Waggoner
FIFTH ANNUAL CONVENTION AT PITTSBURGH, PA. The brethren at Battle Creek decided that it was best to have some one of our faith attend this meeting, and I was requested to do so. This request came too late for me to reach Pittsburgh at the commencement, which was Wednesday afternoon, Feb. 4. But I reached the city that night, or rather before daylight, Thursday morning. The meeting was held only two days, which was a disappointment to me, and I think they who requested me to attend it had the idea that it would continue to the end of the week. The first session was principally occupied in organizing, while the set speeches were mostly in the evenings. This was a meeting of delegates, but largely attended. The number of delegates holding certificates was 641; non-certified, 432; total, 1073, representing 18 States. Petitions to Congress, partially returned as I understood, footed up over 54,000 names. It has been strongly impressed upon my mind that we have under-estimated, rather than over-estimated, the rapid growth and power of this movement. Those who think we have been deluded in confidently looking for a great change in the nature and policy of our government, could but be convinced that we are right in this if they would attend such a meeting as this, or by other means become acquainted with what is actually taking place in this respect. The reason assigned for calling a delegated convention is that no place could be found large enough to accommodate a mass meeting of the friends of the cause. But it is proposed to hold mass meetings in the several States, and have a general grand rally in 1876, the centennial anniversary of Independence. The animus of this meeting cannot be understood nor appreciated by any one who did not attend it. It was a large gathering of delegates and others, and for enthusiasm and unanimity is rarely equaled. This feature can be but feebly described in any published report. And I notice that some of the most significant and stirring expressions are left out of the most complete reports of the speeches yet given. The officers of the Association for the coming year are, President, Hon. Felix R. Brunot, Pittsburgh, with 99 Vice-Presidents, among whom are 4 Governors, 5 State Superintendents of Public Instruction, 9 Bishops, 15 Judges of higher Courts, and 41 College Presidents and Professors; and the others are all eminent men. General Secretary, Rev. D. McAllister, N. Y.; Corresponding Secretary, Rev. T. P. Stevenson, Philadelphia. At the close of the Thursday morning meeting, I went directly to Mr. Brunot, who was Chairman of the Convention as well as President of the Association, and inquired if privilege would be granted to Christians to briefly present objections to the objects of the meeting. He replied there would not. I referred as a precedent to the opportunity given at Cincinnati to Mr. Abbot, who represented the “Free Thinkers,” to offer a protest, and stated my hope that Christian opposers might have the same privilege. He said the favor was granted to Mr. Abbot at that time, but this was a meeting of delegates, not a mass meeting, and it was called for the friends to give expression to their sentiments, and was so large that they had to refuse to hear any, even friends, who were not delegates. His answer was what was to be expected, but I considered it duty to make an effort to obtain a brief hearing. Being very anxious to call the attention of the Convention to our position and to the injustice being done to us, I next tried to get a circular printed to be distributed in the Hall before the opening of the evening session, but the time was too short. As a last resort, I hastily prepared an article and procured its publication in the Daily Post to be issued early on Friday morning, hoping thus to get it before a large number of the delegates before they left the city. I will as concisely as possible give some observations on the meeting. 1. The speaking force of this Convention was composed largely of the various orders of Presbyterians. The President is an Episcopalian. 2. They are evidently popular men among their people, and well calculated to wield influence. 3. They show determination to make the movement popular, and to reach the feelings of the people by every means. In their speeches, they alternate with the most impassioned earnestness and gravest argument the sharpest wit and even laughable puns and incidents. Staid “Reverends” clap their hands in applause as heartily as I ever saw done in any kind of gathering, and Old School Presbyterian Doctors of Divinity, who have generally been noted for clerical dignity, take the greatest delight in raising the cheers of the crowd by their keen thrusts and witticisms. The Commercial was publicly recommended as giving the official report, and of the speech of the President of Washington and Jefferson College, it said: “Dr. Hay’s address was received with frequent marks of approbation, and his witty points drew forth shouts of laughter.” Judging from what I have seen, the standard of piety is not to be elevated by this work. 4. They take special pains to repudiate the idea of uniting church and State, incorporating the denial in their Declaration of Principles, and frequently noticing it in their speeches. Hon. Mr. Patterson said: “Be not misled by the assertion that the movement agitated by this Convention tends to religious intolerance, to wedding church and State. On the contrary, it claims nothing but to secure in the preamble of our national Constitution an acknowledgment of the supremacy of God and the Christian character of our nation.” The President said: “The first amendment in the Constitution provides that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof! We have not proposed to change these. We deem them essential, in connection with the amendment we ask, to the preservation of religious liberty, an effective guard against a ‘union of church and State.’” These sentiments were often reiterated. Yet again the President said: “We propose . . . to place all Christian laws, institutions, and usages, on an undeniable legal basis in the fundamental law of the land.” How these two positions are to be harmonized, they have not said; for certainly “Christian institutions and usages” cannot be placed on a legal basis in the law of the land except by compelling their observance, which they intend to do; but how our government can compel to an observance of all Christian institutions and usages without making laws to establish the Christian religion is not easily seen. It is evident that these men are trying to deceive others, or else themselves laboring under strong self-deception. 5. Most of the speakers united in giving the most doleful view of the state of the nation, of both government and people, and of the tendencies of the age. They say the necessity of the present movement is pressed upon them; they are “warned by the most alarming symptoms;” that nothing but this amendment could save the nation; that “Tweedism is a predominant phase of the business, corporation, and political life, of the nation;” “corruption is rampant; a mortal disease is already upon our nation’s vitals,” &c. All such statements are in strange contrast with the preaching from the pulpits of the land, which represents the world as progressing and growing better, fast approaching to the millennium, and the churches so holding the reins of moral power as to insure the speedy universal triumph of the gospel. Here also it seems as if they were insincere or self-deceived. 6. They do not speak in tones of doubt as to the accomplishment of their purpose; they report nothing but abundant success and the highest enthusiasm wherever their cause is presented. Their whole bearing in the Convention was that of men already flushed with victory. 7. A ready hearing by the people is assured to them in all parts of the country, because they are backed up by so many of the most influential men both in the State and church. Four bishops of the M. E. church, five of the Episcopal, fifteen judges of high courts, one U. S. Senator, editors of important church organs, and not least, so many presidents and professors of colleges, who are molding the religious sentiments of tens of thousands of students who will soon be the workers in the various churches. A few points of great interest to us as a people press upon my mind. The Seventh-day Adventists are, more than any others, deeply interested in this movement. They only, guided by the light of the “sure word of prophecy,” have warned the people for more than a score of years of the coming of these things. They only, on conscientious grounds, stand directly opposed to the movement. It is true that on the question of the enforcement of the first day of the week, it will be brought to bear against the S. D. Baptists as well as ourselves, but as long as they reject our views of the fulfillment of prophecy in this work, so long must the conflict be waged principally with the S. D. Adventists; at least, the work of warning against the worship of the beast and his image must be conducted by believers in the fulfillment of these prophecies. And it must be evident that this warning, which must and will be given, will chiefly arouse the indignation of religious bigots, who hope to do by law that which they cannot do by argument. Religious wars have always been the most77 desperate and sanguinary; religious intolerance is the most implacable. Men will bear opposition in business and politics with more complacency than in religion. All the past goes to assure us that the deepest and most unpitying warfare will be waged against those who oppose the Amendment on Bible grounds and from conscientious motives. One sentiment was expressed which I forgot to notice. Dr. Kieffer said that this movement was more political than ecclesiastical, appealing to the patriotism of all classes alike, and should be accepted by all. Dr. Hodge said it was in no sense sectarian, and the ends it sought could be accepted by one denomination as well as by another—by the Catholic as well as by the Protestant. He said it was destined to unite all classes. And their work was all in this direction. I remember reading, many years ago, the following words:— “When in friendship foemen blend,
God to the weaker pity send.”
A union for victory without union on principle and for the truth will always result in evil, as did that of Pilate and Herod. The crisis is coming! “Who is on the Lord’s side?” The line will soon be drawn. The rallying cry is sounding. “A little while” covers the period of our work, our trials, and our waiting. Victory is near. Patience a little longer. The Saviour, when describing the last-day troubles, said when these come to pass, then look up, for redemption draws nigh. Let us take “Courage in the Lord!” as our watchword, and press forward. J. H. WAGGONER. Pittsburgh, Pa., Feb. 8, 1874. The Sacredness of the Work of God.
By John Nevins Andrews
The work which God has intrusted to his servants is of the most sacred character. It is so to preach his truth that men shall be savingly benefited by it. God designs by human instrumentality to make ready a people prepared for the Lord. Those who lead others to Christ must first be acquainted with him themselves. We cannot teach others to keep the commandments of God unless we ourselves truly keep them. We must teach others to die to self ; and we cannot do this without setting them the example. We must teach the lessons of temperance, self-denial, and patience ; and to do this, we must exemplify these heavenly principles in our own lives. Unless we are thoroughly converted to God, we shall mar his work whenever we touch it. If we do not rule our own spirits, we shall dishonor God. If our tongues are not bridled, we shall show that our religion is vain. If we have not the spirit of sacrifice, we show plainly that we do not participate in the Spirit of Christ, for his was a spirit of infinite sacrifice. The Son of God came down to our earth to die for man. When he comes the second time, it will be to gather to himself the people who are his true disciples. These are the persons who are like him in heart and life. It is the truth faithfully preached, and actually exemplified in the life of those who preach it, that is to thus sanctify men. The Son of God kept his Father's commandments. This it was which rendered his life the perfect model for our imitation. We wish to raise up a commandment-keeping people. To do this, we must show from the life of Christ what true commandment-keeping is, and, so far as feeble man can imitate the life of God's dear Son, we must exemplify that life in ourselves. We are looking for the advent of Christ, and we are teaching the people to look for him. And the apostle says that “every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.” 1 John 3: 3. Our work is to lead our fellow-men to keep the commandments of God, and to look for his Son from Heaven. There can be no more sacred work than this. And we cannot fulfill the trust committed to us without setting ourselves apart for God, both in heart and life. So sacred a work demands that those who engage in it should be indeed men of God. Unless we are such in reality, the truths we preach to others will rise up in the Judgment to condemn ourselves. J. N. A.