Earlier text: The JudgmentMARK TWAIN made the following good hit in a speech made at Montreal: "I came here," he said, "to place myself under the protection of the Canadian law and to secure a copyright. I have complied with the requirements of the law. I have followed the instructions of some of the best legal minds in the city, including my own, and so my errand is accomplished, at least as far as any exertions of mine can aid that accomplishment. This is a rather cumbersome way to fence and fortify one's property against the literary buccaneer, it is true; still, if it is effective, it is a great advance upon past conditions, and one to be correspondingly welcomed. It makes one hope and believe that a day will come when, in the eye of the law, literary property will be as sacred as whisky or any other of the necessaries of life. In this age of ours, if you steal another man's label to advertise your own brand of whisky with, you will be heavily fined and otherwise punished for violating that trade-mark. If you steal the whisky without the trade-mark, you go to jail; but if you could prove that the whisky was literature, you could steal them both, and the law wouldn't say a word. It grieves me to think how far more profound and reverent a respect the law would have for literature if a body could only get drunk on it." IN a number of instances, some good men, having an interest in the good name of our Government, have attempted to prove that in placing a tax on poison beverages, the Government has not licensed or permitted or encouraged the traffic in them; has not taken blood money to condone crime. They have gallantly defended our country and artistically and gracefully whitewashed its politics and politicians; have almost made our people proud to feel that our beloved guardian Uncle is so virtuous as to decline all bribes and blandishments, and say severely to the whisky man: "Sir, I emphatically disapprove of your traffic; I condemn it; I hate it; I despise it; my virtuous soul loathes it; my religious sentiment is in violent rebellion against it; so, sir, while I reward with an approving smile, all the honest industries of this great nation and say "well done" to them—my conscience compels me to punish you by a fine of 90 cents a gallon on the whisky you produce, and $1 a barrel on the pigslush beer with which you poison and curse and debauch the men, women, and children that open two-edged whisky could not get at. And, sir, let me tell you, it is a mercy to you, which you should highly prize, to have me inflict this punishment on you, because your killing, starving, wife-beating, jail-filling, and grave-digging traffic is so vile, that but for this Government protection which I extend to you, my people would soon hang you on the lamp-posts." It is very consoling to take this view of it; it shows us conclusively that the Government is entirely innocent, and the tax is levied with a pure, unalloyed hope of stamping out the traffic; which would have been taxed out of existence long ago, but for the perversity of the man-killers who are too stupid to see it in the true light. If when a bank robber, a forger, a train wrecker, a pickpocket, or a murderer is arrested for committing his particular type of crime, he should produce a receipt from the U. S. revenue office, showing he had paid $25 for the year 1884 as a tax on his retail burglar business, or $100 on his wholesale forgery traffic, there would be some unreasonable people to say that the Government was encouraging and condoning crime, but they would of course be styled fanatics.—Selected. Temperance in Potter County
POTTER County, Pennsylvania, affords a good illustration of what temperance will do in a community. No licenses to sell intoxicating liquors are granted in that county; and one of the many good results is that at the recent Quarter Sessions Court the district attorney announced that he had no bills to present to the grand jury; the sheriff stated that he had no criminals in charge, and the directors of the poor announced that they had no paupers to support. Suppress the liquor traffic in a community, and at least three-fourths of all the crime, poverty, and wretchedness among the people will also cease. Tobacco Use and Selfishness
TOBACCO-USING always makes one selfish, not caring whether he annoys others or not. The smoker especially will puff the nauseating fumes right into your face with perfect impunity. He never dreams of the "personal liberty" of another. Liquor Packages Labeled Canned Peaches
A LIQUOR firm in Massachusetts, in a note at the foot of a private circular, says: "All packages sent from our store to ministers are labelled 'Canned peaches.'" It seems quite probable that Pharoah might have listened to the message of Moses with some degree of interest, when he saw the miracles which were wrought, had not the magicians, with their enchantments, counterfeited the miracles, and thus strengthened the king in his opposition to the word of the Lord. The miracles were given on purpose to convince both Pharaoh and the children of Israel of the divine mission of Moses. But when "the magicians did so with their enchantments," there was power against power, miracle against miracle, and of course Pharaoh chose the side and accepted the miracles which left him free to gratify his own selfish feelings. Paul makes use of this circumstance to point out the dangers of "the last days," in 2 Tim. 3. "Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth." The magicians might have talked, have argued, and persuaded, but they would probably have had but little influence without the miracles. If they were convincing when wrought by Moses, were they not equally convincing when wrought by the magicians? The magicians had almost everything on their side favorable to success. Pharaoh not only did not know the Lord, but it was as greatly against his interest as his inclination to let the people go. Israel was a source of wealth to Egypt. They were many, and their unpaid labor was not lightly to be given up. It is not difficult to see that Pharaoh would gladly hail any evidence which would fortify him against the message delivered by Moses. And so it is in the last days—the days where Paul locates the work of those who imitate Jannes and Jambres in resisting the truth. Our Saviour himself speaks of the same facts, and locates them in the same times. Just preceding his second coming, false Christs and false prophets shall arise, and they shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch that if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect: Matt. 24. Here, again, we see that it is not in their speeches, their arguments, but in their signs and wonders that the power of their deception lies. And again in Rev. 13 and 14, in a prophecy which includes the appearing of the Son of man to reap the harvest of the earth; a prophecy of a power which is represented by a beast having two horns like a lamb, it is said: "And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by those miracles which he had power to do." In every case the strength of the deception is laid in the miracles. Compare 2 Thess. 2. We have no doubt that the great bulk of the deceptive signs and wonders of these last days is found in Spiritualism. Nor have we any doubt that many pretended mediums have been exposed, who affected a power which they did not possess. But even this serves the purpose of the arch deceiver, because it throws thousands off their guard, and leads them to believe that it is all a pretentious, but really harmless, humbug, calculated to deceive only the ignorant and credulous. By this means a great many are induced to slight the evidence of its power and nature, and thus the deception is allowed to work and prosper with little opposition. But they should consider that many have been convinced who were neither ignorant nor credulous. We may name such men as Doctors Hare and Crookes, who were convinced only after long and thorough experimenting. And scores of others, able and patient in their investigations, might be classed with them. Gov. Tallmadge, Judge Edmonds, and many scores of that class, were never converted to the tenets of Spiritualism except by the evidence of an unseen and unknown power. Rev. A. D. Mayo, in a sermon, indorsed Spiritualism as the means of teaching great and needed truth. He said:— "I look upon the alliance of this movement with mesmerism as accidental and temporary. The tipping tables and rattling wainscots will, in good time, be left with other prodigies, in the hands of curious men of scientific leisure for experiment; but this great cry of the popular heart after a rational faith in immortality will shiver numberless churches, and burst the bonds of many a man now enfolded in materialism or petrified into theological marble. We shall learn out of it what it means in the nineteenth century to believe in the immortality of the soul." The editor of the Spiritual Age better understood the relation of table-tipping, etc., to this new theory—he knew that from such a diversity of views as is taught by the spirits, it would be impossible to reduce a system that any reasoning mind could embrace, and that all Spiritualists confidently and necessarily appeal to the evidence of physical power as the groundwork of their theory. The editor remarked:— "In discussing the subject of Spiritualism, the able author takes very comprehensive views of its developments and ultimate uses, regarding it as a 'great cry of the popular heart after a rational faith in immortality.' He seems, however, to have overlooked the fact that this rapping, 'tipping of tables, and rattling of wainscots,' is fast reducing our faith in immortality, hitherto but conjectural, to a scientific verity, and thus constituting it that 'rational faith' which the popular heart of the nineteenth century demands." By reference to the reports of the committees appointed to examine the Fox girls, and to inquire into the causes of the rappings, as well as to the experience of Gov. Tallmadge and others, it will be seen that Spiritualism arose and spread, not by the influence of the truths taught, but by the air of "mystery" which was thrown around it; solely by the evidence that the "raps" were not produced by the mediums. The editor is doubtless right. By these alone their faith is reduced to a verity. The same is clearly shown by a writer in the Spiritual Clarion, as follows:— "Old skeptics who had stood the battery of a thousand pulpits, have surrendered at the tipping of a spirit hand on their unconscious tables. . . . . The little pine wainscot that shook the air in a small room in Rochester has echoed to the ends of the earth, and shakes old creeds like the judgment thunders." To show the effect which these manifestations of power have on the mind, we will instance a case which came under our observation. It relates to the subject of this article. A young lady, the daughter of a man who had many years labored as a Christian minister, was healed by a medium of a disease of long standing. Of course she was an ardent Spiritualist. We tried to reason with her that the manifestation of power was no evidence of the correct position of the one through whom the power was manifested. We referred to the cases of the magicians of Egypt, the sorcerers in the days of Christ and the apostles, and to the prophecies of the Saviour, of Paul, and of John. We made the statement that our earnest inquiry should be as to the origin of the power manifested. She deliberately replied that if we proved it was of the devil, it would only increase her respect for the devil; and that she owed greater gratitude to, as being more benefited by, the devil than God. All this shows that the people are captivated by signs and powers, and by a supposed benefit received, and are led thereby to entirely overlook the fact that to God we owe our "life, and breath, and all things." In one respect Dr. Mayo was right. Table tipping and rapping have measurably ceased; but not because the "popular heart" does not demand demonstration of the power of Spiritualism, but writing and materializing have largely taken their places. They who would not be convinced by the moving of material substances without mortal contact, yield at once to a sight of what they believe to be their lost friends.89 But Spiritualism does not stand alone in the working of these deceptions. They are not all wrought in open opposition to the word of God. Mormonism grew up because of the strength of the same deception; because of its claims to the possession and exercise of "the gifts of the Spirit." They will ask, By what authority do we deny their claim? We answer, By the authority of his word who said, By their fruits ye shall know them. If the fruit is corrupt, the tree cannot be good. We follow Mormonism under Smith, Rigdon, and their associates, from Kirtland to Nauvoo, and examine their work in Missouri and Iowa, and follow their successors from Nauvoo to Salt Lake, and always and in every place the fruit is the same, corrupt, evil, and only evil. Tens of thousands joined themselves to Mormonism who were always displeased with the things which they saw, but which they supposed were accidental and unnecessary attendants upon the system, being attracted by the claim of "the power of healing," etc. They did not understand, or they overlooked the revealed truth that the gifts of the Spirit were given "for the perfecting of the saints," and where this effect was not produced the gifts were spurious, counterfeits, no matter what might be the claim or profession. If any wish to understand what is the fruit of the gifts in the hands of the leaders of Mormonism, let them examine the management of the "Bank of Kirtland," and kindred transactions in Northeastern Ohio; the exercise of municipal authority in Nauvoo; the effect of polygamy upon society in Utah; the administration of Government in the city and Territory; let them read the history of the "Mountain Meadows Massacre," and like transactions. The claim of Mormonism to the gifts of the Spirit of God is as empty and hollow as that of Spiritualism put forth by Gov. Tallmadge and others. The truth is that they who have the Spirit of God never go around boasting of their gifts and graces. As was once said by a Methodist minister of Ohio, "Humility is a good grace, but it does not look well on stilts!" We find people now-a-days, even among Protestants, who proclaim their own holiness and exalted sanctity with all the assurance and self-complacency of the ancient Pharisees. Even in our own city we have known them to scatter cards advertising their prayers for the sick! And some are so short-sighted as to cry out as did the followers of Simon the sorcerer, "These men are the true power of God." They regard the fervor of their prayers, but do not consider that the assurance that God hears us is found in the fact that "we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight." 1 John 3:22. James says: "Is any sick among you? Let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up, and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another that ye may be healed." Jas. 5:14-16. We have unbounded confidence in the promise of God where people walk according to the divine direction. But we have no confidence in those who advertise their power of prayer, nor do we feel under any obligation to believe that God hears prayer where the spirit of confession is lacking. With all the warnings in the word of God we must discriminate between the true and the false; between the genuine and the counterfeit. God has abundantly shown by his prophets the position which his people must occupy in the last days. "The commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus," is their rallying cry. Rev. 14:9-12. When people come to us professing holiness, and speak slightingly of the law of God, we class them with Spiritualists and unbelievers, and turn away from them as having the form of godliness but denying the power. With them the power is in the strength of their feeling. With us it is measured by the obedience of faith, not in making void the law through faith. Rom. 3:31. "This is the love of God, that we keep his commandments." "Let us not love in word, neither in tongue, but in deed and in truth." The Ordinance of John 13.
By Uriah Smith
IS THE washing of the saints' feet a church ordinance? This point must be settled by the testimony of John 13:1-17. The argument usually employed to prove that it is not to be observed as a church ordinance is, that it is only an act of hospitality, a household duty, a lesson of humility, and lastly, a duty well understood to be binding upon the disciples, and not a new ordinance, because Jesus uses the word "ought" in the expression, "Ye also ought to wash one another's feet." We have not yet seen any argument in this direction which was not fully met by the words of our Lord in verse 15: "For I have given you an example that ye should do as I have done to you." This confines the whole significance of the act to the occasion and the circumstances under which our Lord performed it. Whatever it can be shown that the act was, as performed by him, that will be the measure of what it was designed to teach; nothing more, nothing less. We then inquire, Was this act as performed by the Lord to his disciples, an act of hospitality? If it was, then its object doubtless was to teach hospitality; if it was not, it was not done for the purpose of conveying any such instruction. And the proposition we lay down here is, that neither the act as performed by the Lord, nor the circumstances under which it was performed, had any connection whatever with the requirements of hospitality. 1. Those who endeavor to prove it an act of hospitality, refer to such passages as Gen. 18:4; 19:2; 34:32; and Judges 19:21. But these are against them, as they show the custom of those times to have been simply a provision of water that the guests might wash their own feet. But, says the objector, then why did Abigail propose to wash the feet of David's servants? 1 Sam. 25:41. We answer that no one surely will claim that she proposed to do this as an act of hospitality, but only to show her subjection to David; she was willing to become a servant of his servants. But no instance can be found where the master of the house ever, as an act of hospitality, either washed, or proposed to wash, the feet of his guests. No aid nor comfort can opponents derive from these texts. 2. Our Lord ever took occasion to give his instruction when circumstances were such as to call it forth: Jesus had traveled with his disciples, and tarried at their homes; and if he had discovered any lack of hospitality on their part, he would have reproved them, as the occasion required. He did at one time teach them a lesson of humility by setting a little child in the midst, and enjoining upon them to become such as he. Matt. 18:3, 4. And what was the occasion of this? They had been contending about the question who should be greatest; and Christ, in an appropriate manner, rebuked the wrong as soon as it presented itself. He also on a certain occasion rebuked a Pharisee for a lack of hospitality; but it was when there was something to call it out. As he sat at meat with the Pharisee, a woman came and began to wash his feet with her tears, and to wipe them with the hair of her head. When feelings rose up in Simon's heart at this act, the Lord said to him, "Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet; but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head." Luke 7:36-44. The Lord did not say to him, You did not bring water and wash my feet for me; nor, why? Because that was not the custom of the times, and no such action was expected; but he did reprove the lack that there was, namely, his failure to set before him water; and he did it when the occasion called it forth. But there was no occasion for any such reproof or instruction at the time of the institution of the Lord's Supper, when he gave such explicit and plain directions in regard to their washing90 each other's feet. It was not, therefore, designed to teach a lesson of hospitality. 3. The disciples were of course familiar with the customs of the times, and if our Lord had designed to reprove them for a failure to comply therewith, they would at once have understood it. He never gave lessons concerning the practical duties of life in such a way that those for whose benefit they were designed could not understand his design. But the disciples were at first utterly at a loss to determine what the Lord intended by washing their feet; hence he told Peter, "What I do, thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter." 4. The custom of the times was to wash before eating. Jesus performed the act after the paschal supper was ready, and he had sat down. This still farther removed it from any connection with the customs of the times. 5. Peter, seeing no propriety in the Saviour's act, refused to be washed. Jesus then told him that if he washed him not he had no part with him; then Peter, with his usual impetuosity, exclaimed, "Not my feet only, but my hands and my head." Was this an act of hospitality? But the Lord proceeds to correct Peter's extreme here, and says, "He that is washed [or as some read, He that has been bathing] needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit;" that is, he that has been bathing is physically clean; it is not for this purpose that I now apply the water; hence there is no necessity for my washing your hands and your head; I only propose to wash your feet, the significance of which you will understand hereafter; and if you refuse this, you have no part with me. What! If you refuse to receive instruction concerning hospitality, you have no part with me? Is this our Lord's position? No; he never used such language in reference to such things. But his declaration brings up the practice of feet-washing to equal importance with partaking of the bread and wine, concerning which he makes a similar expression: "Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you." John 6:53. In view of all this, it is utter folly for people to talk of this being a lesson of hospitality, or of household duties. We then inquire further, Was it designed simply to teach a lesson of humility? If so, we submit that the very best way a person can show that he receives the instruction is to put into practice the directions given. But what can be said of the use of the word "ought"? We have this to say, that a person must be hard pushed to offer such an argument as this. Our Lord bases the whole of the requirement on the act he had just performed. "If I then your Lord and Master have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another's feet." Because I have done this to you, ye ought to do it to one another. Not because the custom of the times or the claims of hospitality require it, but because I have done it. This is the reason he assigns. "If I, then, your Lord and Master have washed your feet, ye also ought to [what? be humble, be hospitable? No; but] wash one another's feet." This is what the Lord says. This is the specific act he points out, and says we ought to do it. Now ought we to do it, or ought we not? Who knows our duty best—Christ, or these modern interpreters? But strong as this is, the Lord does not leave it here. He continues, "For I have given you an example that ye should do as I have done to you." What had he done to them? Performed an act of hospitality as such? Nothing of the kind. He had washed their feet, and says we should do as he had done; or, as expressed just before, wash one another's feet. Nothing could possibly be plainer. Let any one who doubts this, tell us how it should read, if the Lord did really wish to enjoin upon us to wash one another's feet. Then, shall we do as he did, and has told us to do? or shall we not? These people who get beyond the apostles and beyond the Lord, and set up a way of their own, will excuse us if we cannot put much faith in their teaching, nor esteem them very highly, at least, for their doctrine's sake. Oh! if this scripture only enjoined something which they would love to do, some popular performance, or something that would be agreeable to their pride, ambition, or love of ease, how easy it would be to understand it just as it is. But there is a cross here, and they think to dodge it, and yet, more fortunate than Peter, have an abundant part with Christ in his exaltation and glory. Do you ask what the ordinance does signify? We answer, It is a memorial of the humility of our "Lord and Master," the Prince of glory, just as the bread and wine is a memorial of his death, and baptism of his burial and resurrection. And in view of the plain instruction given in John 13, it is not surprising that the ordinance was practiced in the earlier and purer ages of this dispensation, as we learn that it was, until Rome laid its polluting hands on the ordinances of the church, and either abolished or perverted them in establishing its miserable mongrel of Christianity and heathenism. Kitto's Encyclopedia says: "Feet-washing (pedilavium) became, as might be expected, a part of the observances practiced in the early Christian Church. The real signification, however, was soon forgotten, or overloaded by superstitious feelings and mere outward practices. Traces of the practice abound in ecclesiastical history, and remnants of the abuse are still to be found, at least in the Romish Church." But the time has come when this age is to close with as pure a gospel as that with which it begins; the perverted or neglected ordinances of the church must be restored, and this link must occupy its appropriate place in the golden chain. U. S. A Misquoted Prophecy.
By Editor
THE Bible cannot be improved by all the wisdom of the world. Sometimes by changing its terms it seems better to express the idea desired to be conveyed by the one using it; and it is often supposed that such is the true idea of the text. But it will be found in all such cases that the unity of design, so beautifully shown in the sacred book, has been violated by the change. There is an expression in the prophecy of Habakkuk which is almost invariably misquoted. Indeed we cannot remember when we saw it quoted correctly. But recently we received an article from one of our own brethren in which it was misquoted, and we then decided to call special attention to it. Habakkuk 2:1-4 is a second advent message. Of this any one must at once be convinced on comparing it with Paul's words in the letter to the Hebrews. Read chap. 9:28; 10:25, 35-39. The apostle introduces Christ's second appearing; exhorts those who see the day approaching; and then quotes from Habakkuk 2, applying the vision to the coming of Christ. The prophet was directed to "Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it." But it is always quoted as being written so plainly that "he that runs may read." The idea thus conveyed is that it is to be made so plain that a person who is running may read it; he need not stop to look at it; he may read it as he runs. But read in that manner the importance of the vision is entirely shut out of sight. "Make it plain upon tables, that he may run who readeth it." The vision contains something urgent and startling. Paul gives it thus: "For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry." Again, Paul to the Thessalonians connects the coming of Christ with the coming of "the day of the Lord," and Joel says when the day of the Lord is near, an alarm shall be sounded, the inhabitants of the land are called upon to tremble. Joel 2:1, 2. The message of Christ's coming is an important one; it requires action (See Rev. 14:9-14); it admits of no delay. And the message of Habakkuk is to make it plain on tables—easily seen and understood—"that he may run who readeth it;" that he may start at once. Now consider how tame the expression is made by rendering it—"that he who runs may read." According to this version he is running on his own errand, and casually reads as he runs; according to the words of the prophet he is not running at all until he sees the message; then he starts, runs, as the urgency of the message requires. Is it not a pity that any Adventist minister should misquote this passage, and thereby hide the intent of the prophecy? Brethren, read the texts you quote. If they differ from your former ideas, study them thoroughly before you use them. "BEHOLD, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God; therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not." 1 John 3:1. Our Able Minister.
By S. H. Lane
I DESIRE to speak of the above-mentioned minister in a personal manner, so that our people and his friends generally will encourage him in his field of labor more in the future than in the past. I write of him freely, and shall use some terms of praise in his favor, on account of being so well acquainted with his Christian graces that I know he will not become exalted, as he never gets lifted up because of commendation, or cast down through censure. He has been laboring in our Conference for several years. His labors have been of a self-sacrificing nature. He has never found fault with the little encouragement he has received from us. He has never sent in a bill against the Conference to be settled by the auditing committee, notwithstanding his converts to the truth have quite often replenished our treasury with means, and have donated to purchase tents for other ministers to preach in. Those who embrace the truth under his labors seem innocent of that spirit which causes some to say, "I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas." They are ready and anxious to listen to any accredited Seventh-day Adventist minister, and when they hear the truth they often exclaim, with an animation glowing in the countenances which does one good, "Why, that is just as I learned it." I am now laboring in a new field. A Seventh-day Adventist minister has never preached in the county before. I have a large M. E. meeting-house in which to labor. Commenced meetings Thursday night, November 28. After the discourse, a gentleman and his wife invited me to their home. As I was engaged for the night, I stated to them that I would gladly visit them the next night, if agreeable. They were the first ones to meeting the next evening. I shared the hospitalities of their home, and as we bowed in prayer night and morning, I felt that I had found a home in my new field. Sabbath morning, as I sat down to read, the lady soon joined me, intently reading "Spirit of Prophecy," Vol. 2, which had been loaned to her by one of our missionary workers. As soon as opportunity presented itself, I introduced the subject of present truth, as I had done the night before. I soon learned that she was quite well informed in many points of our faith, and when questioned in regard to the Sabbath, she stated that she was convinced that the seventh day is the only Bible Sabbath, and that she had commenced to observe it. I asked her how she became enlightened and convinced in regard to the subject, and was surprised to learn that it was through the labor of "our able minister." Do you wonder who that minister can be? Well, we call him THE SIGNS OF THE TIMES. His headquarters are at Oakland, Cal., from which place he is ready to visit your friends whom you may be anxious to have enlightened in regard to the truth, providing you will encourage him by giving to the librarian of your church tract society $1.60, who will immediately order him to visit your friend's house weekly one year, and you may be assured that he will do so, rain or shine. The writer visited a reading-room at Indianapolis, Ind., November 28, to become acquainted and do missionary work, and in so doing introduced the above-named minister. The proprietor, on looking at his finely marked face, said pleasantly, "We are receiving that paper, and I wish I knew who sent it, I would thank him." He continued, "As I went to do missionary labor this morning, I took several copies with me, and gave to parties who I thought would read." May the Lord bless the one who encouraged "our minister" to visit that reading-room; and I have fully resolved that his visits shall not cease. Reader, will you encourage this true minister to visit some home or reading-room during the coming year? — S. H. Lane, in Review. THERE are many professed Christians who seem to regard H. W. Beecher as a veritable minister of the gospel of Christ, notwithstanding his denial of the facts upon which the gospel is based, and of his depreciation of the Scriptures which alone teach the gospel. A sensible view of his position is presented by the New York World, in the following words:— “The announcement made by Mr. Beecher that he does not believe in the fall of Adam and in the inheritance of guilt, is less interesting in itself than as the prelude or introduction to the subsequent confession of disbelief which we may expect in logical sequence. The rejection of the doctrine of the fall and of inherited guilt naturally dispenses with any necessity for an atonement or for a divine Redeemer. If we reject the idea of vicarious sin we must also reject the idea of vicarious atonement, and the whole divine element in the mission of Christ disappears at once. Such a form of unbelief is easy to understand, but it is not easy to understand why one who thus unceremoniously rejects the divine mission of Christ should take the trouble of calling himself ‘a Christian Evolutionist.’ There would be as much meaning in the words if, under the same circumstances, he should call himself a Christian pagan. It would be more seemly if those who wholly repudiate the authority of Christ would also repudiate the name of Christian altogether.” Wealth and Political Preferment
POLITICAL preferment in the United States does not lie on the way to the kingdom of Heaven. Wealth rather than capability and integrity secure office in these days. It costs heavily to procure a seat in the Senate of late years. Mr. Fair, of Nevada, is put down as the wealthiest man in the United States Senate. His riches aggregate $18,000,000; those of Mr. Miller, of California, $4,000,000; Mr. Sawyer, of Wisconsin, $7,000,000; Mr. Brown, of Georgia, $5,000,000; Mr. Palmer, of Michigan, $7,500,000; Mr. Sabin, of Minnesota, $2,000,000, and so on. And the Scripture is fulfilled: the poor wise man is forgotten. Eccl. 9:14-16. The Missionary.
By William M. Healey
OUR work in this Conference is certainly onward. Our good camp-meeting at San Jose gave it an impetus, as many returned to their homes, with courage renewed, to press the battle harder. Our ministers and colporters are not many in number, but God blesses our labors. Our reading matter that is being scattered abroad is doing its work, and laying the foundation for future results. Keep the truth before the people, should be our motto, and then support the position by living in harmony with it ourselves. The eyes of the world are upon us as a people, and we in California certainly have a responsible place in the message. My experience has shown me that God is willing to bless any labor that is put forth by us in a way that makes it possible for him to accept it. During the past year there have been many converts to the faith in this Conference, and some new churches raised up. The labors of Brn. Briggs, Israel, and others, in Los Angeles County, have resulted in much fruit, as have also the work of Brn. Ballou and McClure in Humboldt County. The work in San Jose, with which I was connected, has also resulted in a goodly number of precious souls coming into the faith. At first we thought of building a house of worship there, but as so many were unsettled and liable to go away, it was thought best to wait. The meeting at Healdsburg, Jan. 3-13, was in many respects a great blessing. The earnest, faithful testimony of Sister White helped us to see many of our imperfections, and some old roots of bitterness were, we hope, entirely eradicated. We are looking to a general meeting at Woodland to benefit the members of that church, as well as others. I spent one week at Placerville since the meeting at Healdsburg, and the Lord helped us, and four persons signed the covenant to keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. Last Sabbath I spent with the company at Nevada City, and the Lord's blessing rested upon us. Brethren, let us take hold of the work as never before. God is with us. Let all who can, attend the general meetings, and if you cannot be with us, let us have your sympathy and your prayers. W. M. HEALEY. Testimony of a Methodist.
The Seventh-day Adventists having adopted the Bible-reading system as a means of disseminating important truth, it may be of interest to hear the opinion of others regarding the plan. An Illinois Methodist worker gives his experience as follows, in the S. S. Times:— "As a leader of three different young people's meetings, for the past three years, I have spent much time and tried various plans to make the work both 'profitable and instructive,' and concluded, for myself at least, that a Bible-reading is the best means of success. Through introducing Bible-readings in one place, our attendance increased from ten to fifty. At another place, using the readings from the start of the meetings, we had an average attendance of sixty, and the last trial of the plan has increased the attendance from fifteen to sixty. If the leader loves God's word, has great faith in its Author, and is not afraid to work, this plan will succeed anywhere." The African's Gospel Offering
A pious African went to a missionary to present a contribution to send the gospel to others. The missionary thought the negro offered a larger sum than he was able to give, but the man insisted on giving it, saying, "The work of the Lord must be done, and I shall soon be dead."