WHAT about the statement of Nicephorus, that Constantine also ordered that the day of the sun should be called the Lord's day? I am free to say that I never attached much importance to this statement, even before I had instituted any examination of the claims of Nicephorus to be considered a reliable historian. I had studied the life and character of Constantine sufficiently to cause me to doubt the correctness of the statement, let it come from whom it might. All the evidence goes to show that Constantine was never a devoted worshiper of the Lord; that he held Apollo, the sun-god, in reverence during his whole life. His edict in behalf of the venerable day of the sun was in honor of Apollo, as the highest Christian authorities testify. To the time of his death he held the office of high priest of the pagan rites. His veneration for Sunday was in regard to its dedication to the worship of the sun, and that only. There is absolutely nothing in the history of Constantine to justify the belief that the statement quoted from Nicephorus is true.
It was Nicephorus who first ascribed the words of Leo the Philosopher, in which he reversed the law of Constantine in regard to Sunday labor, to Leo I., of Thrace. These were the words that Justin Edwards gave to Pope Leo the Great. I say Nicephorus was first to make this statement, because he is the first authority for that statement of whom I have any knowledge, and I have no knowledge that anyone made the statement again until several centuries after his time. This mistake in regard to the decrees of the Leos, is inexcusable in Nicephorus, because he had the means at hand to verify his assertions, namely, the Code of Justinian, in which the decree of Leo I. was to be found.
In this I am taking for granted that Nicephorus did make the statement. Elliott (Horæ Apocalypticæ) quotes a Doctor Maitland who says that Nicephorus said so; but as no reference is given to book, chapter, or page, I have been unable to verify it. I examined Nicephorus by the table of contents under every word where I thought possible to find it, as Constantine, Sylvester, Dominicum, diem, etc., but could not find it. I also examined considerable that he wrote about Constantine, but did not find the remark in question. I accept, however, the assertion that Nicephorus did say so, and proceed to inquire as to the probability of its correctness.
First, we must guard against confounding this Nicephorus with Nicephorus, patriarch of Constantinople, about the beginning of the ninth century. He also wrote a brief church history, embracing only the period from A. D. 602, the time of the death of Maurice, to A. D. 769. Calistus Nicephorus is supposed to have lived about the beginning of the fourteenth century, but the actual time is unknown. The "Encyclopedia Britannica" says:—
"For the first four centuries the author is largely dependent upon his predecessors, Eusebius, Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret, and Evagrius, his additions showing very little critical faculty; in the later period, his labors, based on documents now no longer extant, to which he had free access, though he used them also with small discrimination, are much more valuable."
Inasmuch as the works to which he had access are not now extant, and he used them without discrimination, as others also testify, how are we to determine that his later writings are much more valuable? Of this we can better judge when we more fully understand his character as a writer. The above quotation says he depended upon preceding historians for the events of the first four centuries. But I think it is not difficult to show that he drew169as largely from imagination and from monkish legends as from the historians named. Certainly he did not draw the statement in question from either of these. It was derived from some other source; and what? who can tell?
The "Real Encyclopedia" of Herzog says:—
"Nicephorus has, as is well known, made no great name for himself by his church history. Good language and dextrous representation have won for him the name of an ecclesiastical Thucydides, during the time when a collection of fables and impossibilities stood just as high" (as a church history).
It goes on to say that Nicephorus spoke slightly of his predecessors, and promised to improve on them by strict adherence to truth; but that the expectation raised by these promises was not at all met by the work itself. The work of Dowling, already referred to, "Critical Study of Ecclesiastical History," says:—
"Though he amply partook of the superstition of the age in which he lived, and paraphrased the writers from whom he derived his information in the affected and extravagant style characteristic of the later Greeks, he has transmitted some important facts of which we should without him have remained in ignorance. He was eloquent, diligent, and inquisitive, though destitute of judgment and discrimination." Pp. 92, 93.
And still the query will arise, How are we to know that they are facts, seeing that no writer but himself has left them on record, and seeing that he was destitute of judgment and discrimination, and dealt largely in fables and legends? The Cyclopedia of McClintock and Strong speaks thus of him:—
"The last of the Greek church historians, and the only one their church produced in the middle ages. He is frequently denominated the ecclesiastical Thucydides, because of the elegance of his style, and the theological Pliny, because of the superstition and credulity which are betrayed in his writings. . . . His work is of great interest, as it is the only contribution to church history which appeared in the East, from the sixth to the fourteenth century. It is, however, generally condemned in modern times as a compilation of fables and absurdities."
The authors of the "Magdeburg Centuries" have shown their appreciation of Nicephorus in the following manner. Speaking of the wonderful things ascribed to Sylvester, such as the baptism of Constantine for the cure of his leprosy, for which the emperor donated to him the city of Rome with lands surrounding, they add: "We will mention nothing here of the wonderful conversion of the Jews, by means of a bullock, to be sure; the restoration to life of one killed by a Jewish sleight-of-hand performer; we wish that boasting style of narration to be sought by those who delight in it, in Nicephorus."—P. 139.
The reader can hardly fail to be interested in the following as a specimen of history. It is from the account by Nicephorus of the baptism of Constantine, the healing of his leprosy, the donation, etc., etc., all of which is to the glory of the Roman bishop:—
"For in this very night, in the enjoyment of his rest, he received a vision, for Peter and Paul, the chief of the apostles, appeared to him and said: O Constantine, we are Peter and Paul, sent to you by the Lord God, that we exhibit to you a sign and indication of healing. They exhorted him that he should inquire for Sylvester, the head of the saints of that city, with whom is a fish-pond, in which if he should bathe, very soon all his disease should cease; and from that grace he should have children innocent and free from the corruption of that disease.
"When sleep left him he called for his physician, who for a long time had stood a long way off, and told him he had no longer need of human help, for help had come by a most high hand. Then when he came to Sylvester he told him that he wished him to consider with reverence and veneration, that the gods, under the name of Peter and Paul, had visited him. And Sylvester said, O emperor, there are not many gods, but one, and Peter and Paul are not gods, but indeed servants and apostles of God, who, because of their faith and devotion, had been in great favor, holding the first place among the saints."—Book 7, chap. 33, p. 286, edition Basel, 1553.
He then proceeds to recount at length those things which all know to be only fables. According to this, Constantine was baptized at the time of his first knowledge of the Christian religion; whereas it is well known that he was baptized in Nicomedia, near the very close of his life. To the chronicler of these fables and legends of the Dark Ages, we are indebted for the statement that Constantine ordered that Sunday should be called the Lord's day.
These stories, told by Metaphrastes and Nicephorus, served an excellent purpose to give honor to the day of the sun, when the words of Sylvester and Constantine had such weight among the benighted and credulous church people. And were it possible to separate the truth from fables in the whole field of church history, who can tell how many statements, now passing for historical truth, would be shown to be fabulous and fraudulent? And yet professed Protestants, of this age of light and Bible privileges, too often leave the word of God, and find their duty in following the customs and traditions of those ages of darkness and mysticism! How necessary at this time to listen to the word of inspiration: "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Isa. 8:20.
The word is a lamp to our feet, and a light to our path. Ps. 119:105. It is sufficient for our every need, for it is given that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. 2 Tim. 3:17. He who adds to it or takes from it, does so at the risk of eternal life. Rev. 22:18, 19.
Now in regard to this, we may conclude as we did in the case of Sylvester. Seeing that "Christian princes" were fully agreed with councils and popes to do honor to this day, we can but think that if Constantine had made an order that the title of the venerable day of the sun should be exchanged for that of the Lord's day, his successors in the throne of the empire would have paid some respect to, or taken some notice of, that order. Some of them would doubtless have given the day that title in their edicts. But they did not. This fact is well stated by Doctor Heylyn, thus:—
"So for the after ages, in the edicts of Constantine, Valentinian, Valens, Gratian, Honorius, Arcadius, Theodosius, Christian princes all, it hath no other name than Sunday, or dies solis; and many fair years after them, the synod held at Dingulosium, in the lower Bavaria, Anno 772, calls it plainly Sunday."—History of the Sabbath, Part 2, chap. 2, sec. 12.
Here I leave the whole subject with the reader, believing that all who want proof for the basis of their belief, will reject as spurious both the statement of Metaphrastes and that of Nicephorus, in regard to orders by Sylvester and Constantine requiring that Sunday be called the Lord's day. Probably no such orders were ever given by any authority in either Church or State. The practice of calling it so grew up gradually, and it was never recognized as being by any authority, either divine or human. Had there ever been any recognition of such authority, there would have been more uniformity in the practice. But, for many centuries, the edicts of emperors and kings uniformly called it the day of the sun; while councils called it indifferently both Sunday and Lord's day. The title Sunday, however, would be more correctly written Sun's day, as this agrees with the Latin from which it is rendered.
In our past examination of this prophecy, we have learned that the seventy weeks, and consequently the 2,300 days, or years, of this chapter date from B. C. 457. We now propose to examine briefly the dates of the several events which, according to the prophecy, were to fall within the first part of the 2,300 years, namely, within the seventy weeks. These events are thus enumerated in the prophecy:
"Seventy weeks are determined [cut off] upon thy people, and the city of thy sanctuary; that sin may be restrained, and transgressions have an end; that iniquity may be expiated, and an everlasting righteousness brought in; that visions and prophecies may be sealed up, and the holy of holies anointed. Know therefore and understand: From the edict which shall be promulgated, to return and rebuild Jerusalem, there shall be seven weeks. Then it shall be fully rebuilt, with anxiety in difficult times. Thence, to the Prince Messiah, there shall be sixty-two weeks. And after sixty-two weeks the Messiah shall be slain and have no justice. Afterwards he shall waste the city and the sanctuary by the prince that is to come. And his end shall be in straits; and to the end of the war desolation is appointed. And for one week he shall confirm a covenant with many; and in the middle of the week he shall abrogate sacrifice and offering; and in the temple there shall be the abomination of desolation, until the ruin which is decreed rush on after the desolation." Dan. 8:25-27, Houbigant's Translation.
As before stated, we have already learned that the edict to restore and to build Jerusalem was promulgated B. C. 457. Seven weeks, or forty-nine years, from this time, namely, B. C. 408, was marked by the restoration of the street and wall of Jerusalem. Prideaux shows conclusively that this work was completed in that year, which was the fifteenth of Darius Nothus; and that the wall was built "in troublous times" appears from the fourth chapter of Nehemiah.
Referring to the restoration, which, according to Prideaux, occurred in 408, the Scripture says: "Thence, to the Prince Messiah, there shall be sixty-two weeks," or four hundred and eighty-three years from B. C. 457, the starting-point. Messiah and Christ mean "anointed" (see margin of John 1:41); and that the anointing of Jesus was at his baptism, which occurred in A. D. 27, we learn from Luke 4:18; Acts 10:30; Matt. 3:16. Before this time Jesus was not the anointed, but immediately after the descent of the Spirit at his baptism, and the forty days' temptation which followed it, we find him entering upon his public ministry, and upon the occasion of his first visit to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, he read and applied to himself the scripture which said: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor." Luke 4:18. Reference is also made to the same fact in Acts 10:38 and Matt. 3:16, previously referred to.
After the beginning of Christ's ministry, one week, or seven years, of the seventy weeks, or four hundred and ninety years, still remained. Of this week the prophecy said: "And for one week he shall confirm the covenant with many; and in the middle of the week he shall abrogate the sacrifice and offering." The latter he did by the offering of himself, as is expressed in the preceding verse: "And after sixty and two weeks the Messiah shall be slain and have no justice." This, as all know, was literally fulfilled in the trial and crucifixion of Christ. Three years and a half from A. D. 27 carry us to the spring of A. D. 31, the time when, according to the best authorities, our Lord was crucified. Then the veil of the temple was rent in twain, signifying that the earthly sanctuary was no longer a holy place, and though sacrifices continued to be offered by those who had rejected the Saviour, they were without signification.
The covenant referred to is of course the new covenant; its terms were preached for three and one-half years by the Lord himself, and by those whom he sent out; it was then sealed by his blood, and during the latter half of the seventieth week it was further confirmed to the Jews by those immediately commissioned by Christ, the Mediator of the covenant. Or, more properly speaking, it was confirmed by the Lord through his apostles. This is the idea conveyed by Mark 16:20, where we read of the apostles that "they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following."
The end of the seventy weeks, or four hundred and ninety years, brings us to A. D. 34, about which time the apostles turned from the Jews to the Gentiles. Upon this point Doctor Hales says:—
"Eusebius dates the first half of the passion week of years as beginning with our Lord's baptism, and ending with his crucifixion. The same period precisely is recorded by Peter, as including the duration of our Lord's personal ministry: 'All the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of [or by] John, until the day that he was taken up from us,' at his ascension, which was only forty-three days after the crucifixion. Acts 1:21, 22. And the remaining half of the passion170week ended with the martyrdom of Stephen, in the seventh, or last, year of the week. For it is remarkable that the year after, A. D. 35, began a new era in the church, namely, the conversion of Saul, or Paul, the apostle, by the personal appearance of Christ to him on the road to Damascus, when he received his mission to the Gentiles, after the Jewish Sanhedrim had formally rejected Christ by persecuting his disciples. Acts 9:1-18."—Hales' Chronology, Vol. 1, page 100.
Thus it appears from our very brief consideration of the eighth and a portion of the ninth of Daniel, that the prophecy concerning the seventy weeks is one of the most remarkable ever given. It not only made known the fact that Christ should die, but it also gave the very time of his anointing, the length of his personal ministry, the date of his crucifixion, and the length of time that his immediate followers should confine their preaching to the Jews. That all these things were fulfilled in the manner indicated and at the very time foretold, is an unanswerable argument that Jesus was the Messiah, and that the Scriptures are divinely inspired. Infidels have recognized this fact and have sought to show that the book of Daniel was written after the events took place which it professed to foretell, but Sir Henry Rawlinson has proved beyond a doubt that the prophecy of Daniel could have been written only at the time that it professes to have been written, namely, in the latter part of the Babylonian Empire and early in the Medo-Persian. Intelligent skeptics have ceased to deny this.
The remainder of the 2,300 years, and the events connected therewith, must be left for another article.
The Sabbath-School.
Old Testament History.
SUGGESTIONS FOR QUARTERLY REVIEW.
(Lesson 13, March 30, 1889.)
1. How many plagues came upon Egypt because of Pharaoh's refusal to let the Israelites go?
2. How many of these were imitated by the magicians?
3. What effect did the work of the magicians have upon Pharaoh?
4. What similar thing will take place in the last days?
5. What power is behind all opposition to the truth?
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do; he was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own; for he is a liar, and the father of it." John 8:44.
6. What was the character and disposition of Pharaoh?
7. What effect did the plagues have upon him?
8. How was he confirmed in his obstinacy?
9. State the instances in which God showed his special care for his people.
10. When, how, and why was the passover instituted?
11. Of what was the deliverance from Egypt a type?—Of the deliverance of God's people from the bondage of sin and this wicked world, to the heavenly Canaan.
12. Show that Christ was the real leader of the Israelites.
13. Relate the circumstances of the giving of the law.
14. Why was the law given amid such terrible majesty?
15. What is the only other event that can compare with the giving of the ten commandments?
16. What great wickedness did the Israelites do while Moses was in the mount with God?
17. What was the nature of their idolatry?
18. What form of idolatry has from the earliest ages drawn men from the worship of God?
ADMONITION, COMFORT, HOPE.
By M. C. W.
PAUL, in speaking of God's dealings with Israel, says that the things "happened unto them for examples [or types]; and they are written for our admonition upon whom the ends of the world are come." 1 Cor. 10:11. In Romans 15:4, he says that whatsoever was written in the Old Testament was "written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope."
Then, certainly, if we use these lessons on "Old Testament History" aright we cannot fail to be benefited thereby. Let us look at some of the lessons which the past quarter has taught us:—
1. God does not forget his people. The Lord had promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that their seed should inherit Canaan. He had foretold the time when the promise should be fulfilled. Gen. 15:13-16. The patriarchs died in faith believing it. Joseph gave the children of Israel a practical lesson of faith when he gave commandment concerning his bones. Heb. 11:22. Israel no doubt professed to believe Joseph. He was a prophet of God. His very remains, resting in Egypt among them, were continually saying that God would deliver his people. But when oppression came, when their sons were slain, when Moses, whom God had chosen to lead them out, was forced to flee, the outlook must have been very dark indeed. And it looked but little better when he, having returned, a sun-browned shepherd with his simple crook, seemed to double the wrath of the king upon them by his demands that Israel should go. Ex. 5:21; 6:9. The very deliverer seemed to make their bondage greater. The people evidently thought that Moses was only self-sent, as before. But God had not forgotten his people. That darkest hour was the herald of the day. Their extremity was God's opportunity. Their helplessness as the least of all nations (Deut. 7:7) could best manifest to the world God's power and glory. And Moses with his shepherd's crook and the presence and power of God, was mightier than all the dazzling glory, power, and wealth of Egypt, earth's mightiest nation. Then and thus he delivered that the world as well as Israel might know that Jehovah was God; that, like Jethro the Midianite, they would acknowledge, "Now I know that Jehovah is greater than all gods; for in the thing wherein they dealt proudly he was above them." Ex. 18:11.
2. God's mercy and forbearance to Pharaoh. He first demanded of Pharaoh to let Israel go that they might serve their God. Ex. 5:1; 8:20; 10:3. The very justice of the request indicated the character of Jehovah. He did not demand that the Egyptians should serve him, contrary to their desire or conscience. He only demanded that his own people, who had toiled for the Egyptians so many years unrecompensed, who had through one of their number preserved the land, should serve him. But Pharaoh, haughty and intolerant, would not grant this simple demand of simple justice and equal rights.
The Lord then shows his power above that of Egypt in the miracle of the rods being turned to serpents. Pharaoh rejects this evidence. No life has yet been taken; not an Egyptian has been injured. God is pleading with the haughty king. Then begin the miracles of mercy, called plagues. They were plagues to the wicked; but if Pharaoh and his people had heeded them, they would have proved messengers of mercy. They were designed to show not only the power of Jehovah above all gods, above all the operations of nature (hence the Creator), but they also manifested the broken reeds on which Pharaoh was trusting,—the gods of Egypt, which were no gods. But Pharaoh would not learn; he set his stubborn heart against all mercy, till the Spirit of God left him forever, and God's mercy and power were manifested in Egypt's destruction.
Let us be admonished by this lesson to heed the first demand of the Lord, to obey the smallest precept, to be faithful now, instead of waiting for greater evidence, or a better time. Had Pharaoh been willing to grant the first request, he would have opened his heart to receive instruction, and would have been saved forever had he remained faithful. But he would not. His example is a solemn warning against hardness of heart and stubbornness of disposition.
3. God's provision for his people and their unbelief. God is infinite in knowledge, wisdom, and power. He knew how he would deliver his people, how he would open the Red Sea, how he would sweeten the bitter water or cause the sweet to flow from the riven rock, how he would supply food for his people, before he sent Moses to deliver them. But every step of the way some manifested their unbelief. They feared at the Red Sea, and thought it was better to serve the Egyptians; they murmured at Marah because of the one bitter thing among so many blessings; they longed for the flesh pots, when just before them, at the time needed "the corn of Heaven" would be given; and finally, after a solemn pledge to obey God's awful voice, they deliberately turned back to the bondage of the Egyptian idolatry.
The seeming delay of deliverance, and the supposed obstacles that arose, were only to try their faith. Faith should have said, as it did say at the Red Sea, "Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of the Lord, which he will show to you to-day." Ex. 14:13. Moses knew by faith in God's word (Ex. 14:3, 4) that God would deliver them, only he knew not how. Moses knew that God would give them bread and water, if he did not know the way in which it would be done. God had pledged his word and his power to deliver his people, and Moses knew that they would be delivered.
God tries our faith in ways as strange to us as these were to Israel. Murmur not, "fear not little flock." Does the Red Sea lie before you? If you are walking in God's light, if you are following Christ, the Pillar of Fire and Cloud, God will open the way. Have you come to the bitter waters of Marah? The Lord has the remedy to sweeten them; let faith apply it. Just beyond are the living wells of Elim. Is your path a desert, parched and dry? He will give you water from the living Rock. And all through your journey it will go with you. He will strengthen you to endure all the ills and woes which he does not remove.
4. There was a great threefold lesson in the giving of the manna. First, it showed God's power to provide whatever his people needed in every place, however barren that place might be of nature's products or resources. Secondly, it pointed out the true Sabbath of the Lord for forty years, so that all who believe his word might never doubt its holiness, nor question whether any other day than the seventh might be the Sabbath. Thirdly, he tried their faith and loyalty. He gave them food; he gave them drink; their raiment waxed not old; and having these, they should have been content. Certainly what more could they have asked on a mere journey to the "land of milk and honey"?
But do not many rebel even as did they? Are not many longing for the flesh-pots of Egypt or the feasts of Baal on their professed journey to the heavenly Canaan? Are we pilgrims on a journey, or dwellers in the land? If we are truly journeying to the "better country," the land of milk and honey, "having food and raiment, let us be therewith content." Christ, the supplier of food, the fountain of living water, will go with us, a Leader, a Helper, a Saviour, the fullness of comfort and hope; and his presence will ever afford us the shadow of the great Rock in a weary land.
IN studying this lesson, the student should compare the account of this miracle given by Mark with that given in Matt. 20:29-34 and Luke 18:35-43. Those who do so will observe an apparent discrepancy between Matthew's account and that of Mark and Luke. Matthew says that there were two beggars, while Mark and Luke mention but one, namely, Bartimeus. This is probably owing, it has been suggested, to the fact that he was the more conspicuous of the two on account of his persistency, and it appears also that he was the spokesman both for himself and for his companion. Mark makes a similiar omission (Mark 5) in his account of the casting out of the devils at Gadara; he speaks of only one demoniac, while Matthew mentions two.
WHAT may appear to some to be another difficulty is the fact that while Matthew and Mark agree that this miracle occurred as Jesus was coming out of Jericho, it would appear from Luke's account that it took place as Jesus was entering the city. Commenting upon this, Dr. Pentecost says: "The discrepancy is not of serious moment. . . . It is not material whether the blind man was healed as Jesus went in or as he came out of the city; the important fact is that he was healed." It has also been suggested that Bartimeus first sought to attract the Saviour's attention as he was entering Jericho, and that failing to secure a hearing he went to the opposite gate of the city, and there waited till the Saviour came out, when he renewed his supplication and was healed. Matthew and Mark record only that which took place after he left the city, while Luke notices the prayer of the blind man as Jesus was entering Jericho, passes over the interval in silence, and records the healing as he was leaving the city. This would comport well with what we know of the energetic character of this poor blind man.
BUT the important point in the narrative is the lesson which it contains of earnest, persistent prayer. If, as seems probable, Bartimeus failed to attract our Lord's attention as he was entering Jericho, and so sought another opportunity, his case certainly affords a striking example of importunity. He was not only blind, but he was poor and friendless; he believed, however, that Jesus could restore his sight, and he was determined that nothing should keep him from laying his case before the great Physician. To him, it was the all-important thing. Some of the multitude followed Christ hoping that he would establish a kingdom, and that they might derive some pecuniary benefit from it; others followed him from curiosity; but this poor blind man thought only of recovering his sight, and he would not be turned from his purpose. The more he was rebuked for his outcries, the more he sought to attract the attention of the Saviour. He felt that if he let that opportunity pass, he probably never would have another, and he cried mightily, "Jesus, thou Son of David, have mercy on me;" nor did he cry in vain; for "Jesus stood still and commanded him to be called. And they call the blind man, saying unto him, Be of good comfort, rise; he calleth thee. And he, casting away his garment, rose, and came to Jesus. And Jesus answered and said unto him, What wilt thou that I should do unto thee? The blind man said unto him, Lord, that I might receive my sight. And Jesus said unto him, Go thy way; thy faith hath made thee whole. And immediately he received his sight, and followed Jesus in the way."
"SEEK and ye shall find; knock and it shall be opened unto you," is the divine injunction and the divine promise. Our Lord is well pleased with importunity. He wants to bestow his blessings, but he will not give them to those who would have no sense of their value. Only those who know the value of spiritual things will value the blessings which Heaven has to bestow. What would the man who does not feel his guilt care for pardon? or the man who does not feel that he is sick care for healing? God does not want us to humble ourselves before him to taunt us with our condition, but that we may realize our need of the blessings which we seek. He would have us feel that we are soul-sick before he heals us; that we are morally polluted before he cleanses us; that we are spiritually blind before he gives us sight; and that we are sinners before he pardons us.
The Missionary.
By Elizabeth Rundle Charles
MORE BLESSED TO GIVE.
Is thy cruse of comfort failing?
Rise and share it with another,
And through all the years of famine,
It shall serve thee and thy brother.
Love divine will fill thy store-house,
Or thy handful still renew;
Scanty fare for one will often
Make a royal feast for two.
For the heart grows rich in giving,
All its wealth is living grain;
Seeds which mildew in the garner,
Scattered, fill with gold the plain.
—Elizabeth Rundle Charles.
LABOR AT ST. HELENA, CALIFORNIA.
By E. P. Daniels, Wm. Ings
WE came to St. Helena January 30 and began labor in this church immediately upon our arrival, and continued uninterruptedly until February 28, at which time we held our last meeting, after having baptized thirty-six in the St. Helena Creek. During the meetings in this place, the Lord certainly came near to the hearts of these brethren, showing them their sins, and helping them to put them away by repentance and confession. There has been no fanatical or spasmodic moves made during these meetings, but there has been a deep, settled conviction of wrongs done, and a faithful, persevering effort to correct them wherever the injury has been committed. We are gratified to know that those who have been for a long time unsettled about the management of our Health Retreat, and have permitted themselves to indulge in criticisms discouraging to the management, and injurious to the institution, are now heart and soul its friends. Some difficulties that existed in the church, which were of a most unpleasant character, have been removed, and those suffering from them have been saved from death.
At a business meeting held February 27, some changes were made which seemed most necessary. Brother Atwood and Brother Pratt were re-elected as elders of the church, with Brother J. Fulton, who serves as the first elder. This was done that Brother Fulton might feel free to perform the duties of such an office at the Retreat, where it seems such duties are most required. There is a good missionary spirit in the church. Eighty-three missionary boxes were taken, many of which were dedicated at once. We have reason to believe that God has set his hand to help this church, and will continue the work until they are entirely sanctified by his truth. We left St. Helena for Healdsburg February 28, stopping one night on the way to hold service with the church at Calistoga.
E. P. DANIELS, WM. INGS.
LOCKWOOD, MONTEREY COUNTY, CAL.
By George E. Hollister
SINCE camp-meeting last fall, I have been trying to cultivate this portion of the field allotted to me by the Conference. I arrived here October 16, and found Brother and Sister Edwards, who were keeping the Sabbath before I moved away from here, still firm in the faith, and trying to do what they could to help on the good work. I found the good seed sown by Brother Thurston still germinating, and one person had begun keeping the Sabbath.
I knew before I came that there was not only a strong prejudice against the truth, but also against myself. The words of our Saviour are as true to-day as when spoken 1,800 years ago, in Judea, "A prophet is not without honor save in his own country and among his own people." Not that I am a prophet by any means, but here is where I followed the humble occupation of a farmer; and if my Saviour felt the chilling influence of that principle in the hearts of his fellows, it would be nothing strange if one so poorly qualified as myself should realize it also. However, I believed that God had some precious souls even here who were looking for precious truth, and would receive it though it were brought to them in a broken vessel. I felt, as did others, that if there was a work done here it would be all of the Lord. Realizing this, I besought aid from One who is able to help in every time of need, and who heareth even the young ravens when they cry. As a result of that aid granted, we were able to organize a Sabbath-school on Sabbath, January 5, with fifteen members, which has now continued for two months with unabated interest.
There are also at this time twelve who are trying to keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, eight of whom have signed the covenant, and nearly all are wishing baptism, which I hope they may soon have the privilege of receiving. I am in hopes also of being able to report a Tract Society organized. Truly we may say, "Behold what God hath wrought!" National Reform has also received due attention, and the petitions in opposition to the Blair bills have been thoroughly circulated, and we are still pushing the work.
GEO. E. HOLLISTER.
A CROOKED RULER.
"THE Bible is so strict and old-fashioned," said a young man to a gray-haired friend, who was advising him to study God's word if he would learn how to live. "There are plenty of books written nowadays that are moral enough in their teachings, and do not bind one down to the Bible."
The old merchant turned to his desk, and took out two rulers, one of which was slightly bent. With each of these he ruled a line, and silently handed the ruled paper to his companion.
"Well," said the lad, "what do you mean?"
"One line is not straight and true, is it? When you mark out your path in life, do not take a crooked ruler."—Christian Worker.
Difficulty as a School of Progress
By O. Dewey
DIFFICULTY is the very school of culture and progress.—O. Dewey.