Earlier text: Its SourceCHRIST IN CREATION.
By Elder R. C. Porter
JESUS CHRIST, "the same yesterday, and to-day, and forever," says: "My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater; so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth; it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it." To lead all to the full assurance of faith by the power there is in that word to transform us into the divine character, he revealed its power in the work of creation. God through Christ created the universe and all things therein. Of Christ it is said, "And he is before all things, and by him all things consist." Col. 1:17. We are not left to conjecture as to how the work of creation was accomplished. God's method is plainly stated. It was not, as a false theory of speculative science presents it, a development that required untold ages for the formation of this earth, but "he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast." Thus "by the word of the Lord were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth." In the first chapter of Genesis we have the record of the fitting up of the earth for the abode of man, after it had been spoken into existence. All was confusion and darkness until God said, "Let there be light, and there was light." He continued to speak, and the wonderful transformations were wrought, through the word of his power, until within six literal days all was perfect in symmetry and a paradise of beauty. So far beyond the comprehension of human reason are the mysteries of creation, that Inspiration declares that none but those who believe the divine record will understand it. "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." Heb. 11:3. He who thus created all things by the word of his power can create within us clean hearts and renew within us right spirits. He that caused the light to shine out of darkness in creation, can shine in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. If with troubled hearts we come to him, the "Peace, be still," that calmed the stormy Galilee, can as quickly give us the peace within that passeth all understanding, the wonderful blessing that maketh rich and addeth no sorrow with it. This is the import of the lesson of creation as revealed to us in his word. The motive in creation was love for others, for "God is love." 1 John 4:8. And "thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created." Rev. 4:11. Since God is eternal, unchanging love, the only motive that could prompt him to create was to bring into being other intelligent creatures upon whom to bestow his love. But the record states, "All things were created for his pleasure." How, then, can it be truthfully said that his only motive in creating was love for others? Because God is love; therefore the pleasure of God is love, and the supreme delight of love is the highest pleasure of God; and "love seeketh not her own." 1 Cor. 13:5. Therefore his motive in creation was solely unselfish love for others. He created us to love us. In this he finds his highest pleasure. "Ay, love's gain is love." Christ, our example, was not satisfied to enjoy the wondrous love of God alone; but he would create other intelligent beings to be sharers of his Father's love. O unselfish Son of God, we would be like thee! The right of choice was granted to all. God could take no pleasure in enforced worship from his subjects. "Without freedom of choice there could have been no development of character," no heartfelt worship or service. The intelligent creatures throughout the universe, both in heaven and in every world, would, if not given freedom of choice in the service of God, stand in the same relation to him in the service as their inanimate planetary system. If man were not created to stand in a different relation to God from the planets, which were created for his home, then all were made in vain, "for thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited." Isa. 45:18. Since the planetary system would have been created in vain if it had not been made to be inhabited, it would have been made equally in vain if it were to be inhabited by human machines, whose only service was that of eternally fixed, forced compulsion, from which they could not break away. Hence, God placed the universe under the claims of the eternal law of love. This law was but the outgrowth of his own character of infinite love. He could give no other, because in the principles laid down in the law of love was summed up the happiness of his creatures. To obey, and enjoy happiness and life, disobey, and take misery and death, was not spoken as a test of loyalty only, but it was thus spoken also because the happiness of all his intelligent creatures depended upon their acceptance of the principles of supreme love for God and confiding and unselfish love for one another. Without supreme love for God there could be no unselfish love for one another. He is the source of all unselfish love. From him it comes to us. The first natural response in return is love to the Giver of such a matchless gift; and then comes the desire begotten of this love, to bestow love upon all about us. Hence the law, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbor as thyself." As long as all practiced these principles, there would be perfect unity and happiness throughout the universe; wherefore the warning of infinite love, "Of every tree in the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Gen. 2:16, 17. How plainly is the right of choice in religious service here left with each individual! Jesus would not compel the children of his creation in religious things. His children are like him. Could we but see the unseen, and know the reasons to us unknown, and comprehend the things beyond our finite comprehension, we would always see and know that the object of all God's words to us is our highest good. So we can lay it down as a principle of universal application, "He doeth all things well." And "every word of God is pure." Prov. 30:5. Therefore it is safe to act upon every word of God, whether we understand the reasons for it or not; and it is unsafe to reject the word of God, for any cause. [The next article will be "The Sabbath in Creation." Ed. S. of T.] BE ESTABLISHED.
By J. R. Howatt
A GOOD tree, a strong tree, strikes its roots deep down. The temple in Jerusalem was built upon a rock, and it is said that the foundation was as deep as the building itself was high. It must be so with us if we would be established. We must work, but we must also pray, and the more work we have to do the more prayer we must make. We must think of this world, but we must also think of the next. We must do what is right by men, but we must also do what is right by God. When we "get on" in this world, get riches, get more mercies, get more comforts, then we must get a deeper, deeper trust and hold on Jesus Christ. If we don't do that, if we don't get in deeper with Jesus as we get on more in the world, one day we shall be found adrift, for we have had too shallow a grip, we have not been established. Be established, settled on Jesus, for life and for death, once and forever.—J. R. Howatt. TIME OF INHERITANCE FUTURE.
By William Covert
THE KINGDOM OF GOD UPON THE EARTH.
THAT the time for the saints to possess the earth has not yet arrived will appear as the Scriptures upon that subject are examined. It has been shown from the Abrahamic promises that neither the patriarch nor his promised seed had in the apostle's days received enough of the promised earth to make them standing room. Acts 7:5. In following the line of earthly kingdoms Daniel was shown their succession until the kingdom of Christ should fill the whole earth. He said: "The kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him." Dan. 7:27. This testimony is so plain that there is no need of any mistake in its meaning. The dominion is universal, being under the whole heaven. It comes in after the destruction of those kingdoms, which were begun by Nimrod, the first great usurper of power among the descendants of Noah. When it is brought in, all rulers will serve and obey the Most High. It is an everlasting dominion, and agrees with a parallel statement in chapter 2:44, which says that this kingdom shall never be destroyed; neither shall it be left to other people. It is not to pass from one ruler to another, nor change title from one owner to another. It will then have taken the place of every other kingdom and ownership which had preceded it upon the earth. It is well then that it is settled once for all and "stands forever." The inheritance promised the saints cannot become an established fact in their possession until the King of Righteousness shall rule in peace. Then the uttermost parts of the earth are to be in his possession. Ps. 2:8. This rule will continue without a break through endless ages. Luke 1:33. When the land of Palestine was divided among the descendants of Jacob, each tribe was allotted a definite portion, and these allotments were divided among the families, never to pass in permanent title to other people. The commonwealth of Israel was a miniature kingdom faintly representing in outline the everlasting kingdom of God upon the earth. The original plan as settled under Joshua was that the Lord himself was king and the people held the earth by divine allotment. It was taken by conquest from the enemies of righteousness and given to those who agreed to keep the commandments. The inhabitants in the land had made themselves so vile that the land itself was made sick because of their abominations, and therefore it refused longer to retain them in possession. As the Lord was teaching Israel preparatory to entering the land of Canaan, he said: "The land is defiled; therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants. Ye shall, therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, . . . that the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that were before you." Lev. 18:25-28. Sin is so repulsive that it makes the very land and the dwellings sick where it is practiced. See Jer. 9:19. Before the Lord would establish Israel as a nation, in a land whose inhabitants had been cast out because of transgression, he took of the whole people a solemn pledge of obedience to his laws and of faithfulness to him as their divine ruler. And when they became as bad as the nations whom they superseded, they were themselves cast out. In fact, the Lord would prefer a barren waste rather than a populous land all given over to the works of abomination. In the closing scenes of David's life he said: "The Spirit of the Lord spake by me. . . . He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God. And he shall be as the light of the morning, when the sun riseth, even as a morning without clouds; as the tender grass springing out of the earth by clear shining after rain." 2 Sam. 23:2-4. David himself had been a ruler, yet he acknowledged that his house had not so been with God. He in his rule had not reached that perfection. Nevertheless he knew that through the everlasting covenant all that had ever been promised would be brought to pass. Verse 5. The principles contained in the above propositions show that there can be no permanent ruler nor abiding people upon the earth only as associated in righteousness, that the earth cannot yield her strength to sinners, nor long send forth her fragrant beauty to glorify the dwelling place of wickedness. There must, therefore, be an eternal reign of righteousness over an upright people in order to fulfill the scriptural predictions relating to the earth. It is, therefore, written of earth's destined Ruler, "Righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins." And it is said of the condition of the earth and the things upon it under this rule, "They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea." Isa. 11:5, 9. Of the land, and of God's people at that time, it is written: "Thou shalt also be a crown of glory in the hand of the Lord, and a royal diadem in the hand of thy God. Thou shalt no more be termed Forsaken; neither shall thy land be termed Desolate; but thou shalt be called Hephzibah, and thy land Beulah; for the Lord delighteth in thee, and thy land shall be married. For as a young man marrieth a virgin, so shall thy sons marry thee; and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice over thee." Isa. 62:3-5. We ask the reader to study the whole connection and see the wonderful beauty of the subject. The prophet gives us the whole future kingdom of glory upon the earth in the context. But the point we are now considering is the earth and its inhabitants under the eternal reign of Christ. In the view given the land is purified from sin and restored to its primeval state of holiness, with the redeemed sons of Adam each allotted a part to possess forever. At that time the whole earth will be inhabited and each possessor will know his part and place forever. The joy of such a possession, and the rejoicing of the Lord himself in seeing his people so happy and free, is illustrated by the figure used by the above scripture. This happy state will be realized "when the Son of Man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him," and, making the proper separation through the judgment, he shall say: "Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world." Matt. 25:31-34. May the reader and the writer receive an inheritance then. RELIGION OF THE MONKS CONSIDERED.
By Elder I. E. Kimball
I HAVE spoken of celibacy and virginity as an imposition upon all the "religious," clergy and ascetics. We have now to consider whether the holiness of the recluse was enhanced thereby. Many persons, "for the kingdom of heaven's sake," have lived in godly simplicity unmarried, and this is recommended in Scripture, in consequence of the natural inclination to seek to please the husband or the wife, rather than God; and because of the inevitable "trouble in the flesh," and worldly cares, Paul says, "I would have you to be without carefulness," "that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction." 1 Cor. 7:28, 35. Manifestly, then, one who chooses the life of the caelebs (single life) that he may attend upon the Lord without any distraction, chooses the better part. But this is a matter of choice not of necessity, for, adds the apostle, "If he marry he hath not sinned," the Nicene doctors to the contrary, however, for with them to marry was to forsake religion. It must be remembered that the monks were the "religious," the "converted." Now, the one whose heart is so set upon God, whom God has sanctified to do his work, who, that he may attend to the duties of his high calling, would exclude all cares of a worldly nature, cutting every cord that binds to earth, such an one, living in voluntary singleness of life, whom God trusts with his power, may also be safely trusted of man. We have Christ's example in this. But what have we to say of an iron law prohibiting unconditionally and absolutely the marriage state? It is not choice henceforth, but necessity; but what if the heart does not coincide with the outward regulation?—Then the "passions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death." Then when we would do good, evil is present with us, and "the evil which I would not, that I do." Well, then, to impose such a law upon an unconverted man would certainly precipitate his ruin, for the passion for married life will certainly result in his trenching on the rights of others. Therefore, to avoid fornication, saith the Spirit, "let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband." To show the baleful results of that law which imposed celibacy and virginity upon "hundreds of thousands" in the Nicene era (and in fact it has been operative all the way down the ages to the present), we have but to note the confessions of the monks, made at times in their seventieth and eightieth years, showing how they became addicted to horrid vices and subject to loathsome infirmities. Salvian, writing in the generation following the Nicene era, whose testimony is conclusive as showing the quality of the religion which came as a product of these church doctrines, about A.D. 440 said:— But it is only the laity, I warrant you, who sin at this rate. Not surely some of the clergy; worldly men, not surely any of the monks—religiosi! Aye, indeed; under a color of religion, sold to worldly vices, these men, who after a course of shameless profligacy and crime, inscribing themselves with a title of sanctity, differ from what they once were583 in profession only, not in conduct. They have changed their name, not their life; and thinking the garb of piety to contain its substance, they have put off the garment only, not the mind of their former estate. So it is that others, with the less odium, profess themselves guilty, who when they declare themselves to have done penance, relinquish neither their former manners nor their attire; for in such sort, on almost all occasions, do they (the monks) behave that you would suppose them not so much to have repented of their former crimes as since to have repented of their repentance; not so much formerly to have repented that they had lived immorally as afterwards that they had promised to live better. These men well know that what I am saying is true; their own conscience bears testimony to every word. . . . After taking the name of penitents they became the buyers of the most ample and unwanted powers. How should not such men repent of their (professed) repentance? Can one believe it that men should have been thinking anything of conversion, and of God, who, abstaining from intercourse with their own wives, have made no scruple of trenching upon the rights of others? and who, while they make profession of bodily continence, act like bacchanals in the debaucheries of the mind? Truly this is a new sort of conversion, which consists in abstaining from what is lawful, and perpetrating what is unlawful. Oh, yes, they deny themselves the marriage bed, but they deny not themselves ravishing! What is this?—Foolish doctrine! God has forbidden sins, not matrimony.—De Gubernatione, pp. 185-187. The facts that God has made marriage lawful for all men, and gives the express enactment that the bishop must be "blameless, the husband of one wife," and "let the deacons be the husband of one wife," show plainly that the Nicene law against marriage was not a good law; for God's laws are good, and this conflicting law was of the devil; and it soon precipitated the church into a mire of pollution. Again, let us examine their piety as expressed in prayer and their daily routine. One author speaks of the devotional labors of the ascetic as "liturgical task work," which they scrupulously adhered to day by day, chalking off prayers by the score and by the hundred as though the demon would have them, if they said one too few. Fifty prayers must be said, fifty psalms sung (more or less according to strength, constancy, and supposed holiness of the performer), as though heaven were pleased with the "multitude of words" wherein "there wanteth not sin." "Ye have wearied the Lord with your words," said the prophet, and Christ spake of the heathen who thought themselves heard for their much speaking. "Be not ye therefore like unto them," said the divine Master, "for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him." The monk viewed God more as a severe taskmaster than as a God of love. How weird and stupid the scene when at midnight the abbot called the sleepers from quiet repose to say a score of prayers and sing or say perhaps an equal number of psalms, and then relegated them to their iron pillows again. They certainly took crosses and judgments into their own hands. They thought to expiate and extirpate sin by scourgings and flagellations. Imagine the poor anchorite in his lone cavern, muttering his many paternosters, counting the rosary, or throwing down a pebble at the conclusion of each; look at the half-frenzied countenance as he sullenly shifts his iron girdles, eats his raw herbs, and drinks his fetid water; look at his dirty sheepskin garb, and still more dirty physiognomy, for water has not cleansed away the filth for years. See him comforting himself with bones and beads and crucifixes, and, horrors! human bones, which he seems to prize as rarest jewels, to charm and drive away foul spirits and fleshly fiends. Tell me, equitable reader, is this Christianity? Listen while he makes supplication to his God. Does he give thanks for sins forgiven and purged by the blood of the Redeemer? Does he render thanks for the gift of the Holy Spirit sent forth into his heart? Does he plead his inability to do any good thing without divine aid and strength from above? Does his countenance beam with joy at thought of the love of his Father and Redeemer, by whom he lives, and through whom he can do all things?—No, we can hear nothing of all this. But see! Here are visitors; they have brought a demoniac, and implore the saint(?) to come forth and expel the spirit. He comes forth; but which is the demoniac and which the saint? We are liable to a sad blunder unless we are careful. Now they set to with oaths and imprecations. He whom ye called saint swears roundly "by Christ," and feins a frightful rage; but the demon submits, they haste away, and the recluse seeks again his cell, for profitable meditation. Such was the religion, and no better, of which the Nicene Church boasted of being in possession. INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.
By H. F. Phelps
First Principles in Government.
Our fathers builded well, and much better than they knew, when they, in that immortal document, the Declaration of Independence, said:— We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
The object of this paper is to call attention to unalienable rights, those rights that are common to all men, of every class and every nation, without any distinction whatever. There was a time when these rights were acknowledged, and inasmuch as they were acknowledged, and men were willing to defend them, they were engrafted into the fundamental law of this land. Upon these rights this government builded. But, strange as it may seem, we have entered upon a time when these rights are forgotten, ignored, and even denied, notwithstanding they have been recognized, and, so far as was possible to be assured to posterity, they were assured and guaranteed to the present generation in our national Constitution. Inasmuch as this is the situation at this very time, it becomes a necessity to urge attention to this question. There are many perplexing questions, of national importance, difficult of solution, as matters now appear, that could easily be adjusted by an understanding and application of the principle of individual rights. It is only by a recognition of these rights that a republican form of government becomes possible. This is simply self-government, and it is only by a recognition of those rights equally bestowed upon all men, that self-government is possible. It follows, therefore, that when the great mass of the citizens of a republic shall forget, ignore, and repudiate this principle, which is the foundation of the government, and override and subvert its constitution, which was set up as a safeguard of these rights, the end of that republic cannot be far removed, and that for the very reason that under these circumstances self-government becomes an impossibility. In this is seen the necessity of every person becoming thoroughly cognizant of these rights as vested in their neighbor, as well as in themselves, and so be willing to allow to others what they claim for themselves; and as vested in themselves also, as well as in their neighbor, in order that they, having clearly-defined views of their own rights, may be able, by argument, at least, to defend these, and not become a slave to unjust laws, or a tool in the hands of those who do not recognize these rights. We said our fathers builded wisely and well. Let us see. All men are not equal in social position, or physical powers, or mental ability; but it is a self-evident truth that, so far as the work of creation is concerned, all men came into the world equally endowed with certain rights, one no more nor less than another. Whatever these rights may be, all are equally in possession of them at birth. They are gifts of nature's God. As truly stated, they are "inalienable rights." As, therefore, they are inalienable, no man can, of right, become dispossessed of them upon entering into the world or society, but he comes into society with these rights already in possession, and in just the same way that he enters society with his eyes, his hands, or any other organ of his body. Every individual is, therefore, surrounded upon all sides with the equal rights of others. It would follow, therefore, that there can be but one limitation to the enjoyment of these rights, and that one limitation would affect all men alike. That one limitation can be no other than the equal rights of another. Within this one limitation every individual has the most perfect liberty in the exercise of his will, in the enjoyment of these rights. This thought is most happily expressed by Mr. Spencer, as follows:— Every man has the right to do whatsoever he wills, provided that in the doing thereof he infringes not the equal right of any other man.
This is, in reality, just what is called civility. It is when a man oversteps this one limitation that he becomes uncivil. Incivility is trespassing upon another's rights. All men should be civil—that is, respect the equal rights of all others. If all men would do this, there would be no need of civil government. We may reasonably conclude that if man had not fallen, but had remained loyal to his Maker, all men would have respected these rights, would have been civil toward all others. But in the present fallen condition of the race all men will not be civil. All men are so supremely selfish that nothing but divine power, by the grace of God, can so change the heart of man as to enable him at all times to respect these equal rights in all others, by allowing to all others that which he claims for himself. As all men will not be civil, in this fallen condition, it becomes necessary to organize what is called civil government. But this spirit of selfishness is so prevailing that governments become uncivil, not respecting these rights, but legislating in a manner to subvert these rights in the individual. And because this is so it becomes necessary to adopt constitutions prescribing the limitations of the authority of the government itself. Thus while constitutions are respected, and legislative bodies enact laws in harmony with these constitutions, and the courts interpret laws in harmony with the same, and citizens respect these rights of one another, then it is that the government is prosperous. But when the people forget and ignore these rights, when courts misinterpret, and legislative bodies override constitutions, what can come from such a course less than ruin itself?8 Now this is exactly the situation in this nation, for the people have forgotten their own rights, and do ignore the demands of others who claim their rights. The courts, even the Supreme Court, has misinterpreted the supreme law of the land, making the Constitution mean what it does not say, and was never intended to mean, in that it is made to give its voice for a union of religion and the State, declaring that "this is a Christian nation," and that "this is a religious people." And, as a logical result, legislative bodies do ignore the Constitution in the councils of the nation, by engaging freely in theological discussions and religious legislation. And the end is not yet. This principle of equal individual rights was once acknowledged, but it is quite the contrary now. Thomas Jefferson once said:— The spirit of the times may alter, will alter. Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless. A single zealot may commence persecution, and better men be his victims. It can never be too often repeated that the time for fixing every essential right on a legal basis is while our rulers are honest, and our people united. From the conclusion of this war we shall be going downhill. It will not be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. The shackles, therefore, which shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of this war, will remain on us long, will be made heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion.
To those fully awake to the present situation, this would almost seem to have been uttered by inspiration. Even the less thoughtful must notice the universal mania for wealth, and the almost universal disregard for the rights of others. There were some "shackles" that were not thrown off at the conclusion of that war. These were in the form of laws favoring religious institutions, particularly Sunday laws, borrowed from the Old World, and just so much a union of Church and State. These, in turn, have been adopted by younger States, and in the minds of many they are regarded as more sacred than all the constitutions of the States which guarantee these rights. And now they are becoming as "shackles" upon the very principles of individual rights of conscience, growing "heavier and heavier." And shall "our rights revive," or will they "expire in a convulsion"? But a bright ray of hope illumines the horizon. Jesus Christ, the Creator of man, and hence himself the Author of these rights, did, in his own life, and by his own teachings, leave to all succeeding generations a living vindication of individuality in all things, and of individuality in religion and religious observances above all things; and not only so, but he gave his own life that man might be forever set free from all bondage, and that he might enjoy the rights of conscience above all things. And so, when all the nations of earth who have enjoyed the light of the gospel of freedom, shall turn against these principles, and deny them to the people, then it is that they will have fully disconnected themselves from all righteousness, and then will the time come for him to take the kingdom to himself, and, once more vindicating the rights of conscience in behalf of his followers who have themselves suffered in vindication of these principles, and visiting with a rod of iron the perversity of their own ways upon his enemies, who have denied these principles, will save his people with an everlasting salvation. Who, then, will be true to these principles? KATYDIDS, LOCUSTS, AND GRASSROPPERS.
LAST summer a little girl became much interested in a katydid that lived in a tree near her window. The last thing she heard at night was "Katy did, Katy didn't," growing fainter and fainter as she grew more sleepy, until the next thing she knew the sun shining in at the window told her it was time to get up, and that her "gentleman in green," as she called him, had gone to sleep for the day. Probably one reason why she cared so much about the katydid was that her name was Katy, and she liked to fancy that he knew that, and was talking about something she had done. She sometimes joined in softly saying, "Katy didn't" when he asserted that "Katy did," though her uncle told her that among the katydids the men did all the talking. When the days began to grow short and cold, Katy missed the voice of her "gentleman in green," and went to Uncle John to find out where the katydids went in the winter. She felt really sorry when he said that their lives were only one summer long, and that her friend was probably dead, but became very much interested when Uncle John, cutting a twig from a tree, showed her where the mother katydid had prepared a smooth place, and fastened securely in rows some gray eggs that would stay there all winter, and in the spring break open at one end, as the young katydid pushed his way into the world. Katy thought it wonderful that the eggs could stand the cold snows and ice of winter. But when this spring her uncle showed her the young locusts coming up out of hard ground, through which they had bored their way with ease, and told her that they were "seventeen-year locusts," so called because the eggs were laid in the ground seventeen years ago, where they had been ever since, and that it took that long time for them to hatch, she thought the locusts more strange than the katydids. She could hardly understand some of Uncle John's stories of the harm they had done in Eastern countries, especially585 when he said they were once so numerous as to block a river in its course. But as she saw how even the young locusts ate every green thing they could reach, she could see why they should have been named from two Latin words meaning "a place destroyed by fire," because places where they had been in great numbers looked as if swept by a fire. Uncle John said he had never seen such an army of locusts as is spoken of in the Bible (Joel 2:25), but that one August when he was in Dakota, where the wheat was ripe and ready to cut, the crop large, and the farmers happy, thinking it would bring them a good deal of money, he noticed men looking anxiously toward the sun. Asking why, one said: "See those things high in the air that look like thistledown? Those are grasshoppers, and if the wind changes, they will come down and ruin our crops." No wonder they looked anxiously. The wind did change that night, and, though it changed back again in about twenty-four hours, taking the grasshoppers on again, they had in one day ruined all the crops, eaten every green leaf, and left the farmers poor and discouraged. "These grasshoppers," Uncle John added, "are nearly related to the seventeen-year locusts, whose family name is really Cicada, and to your friends, the katydids." "Well," said Katy, "I am glad the 'gentleman in green' wasn't so wicked as some of his cousins, but I'm sorry he belongs to such a bad family."—Selected. EUROPE is all agog over the visit paid by the emperor of Germany to the pope. The emperor was accompanied by a suite of seventy-five, consisting of generals, colonels, princes, and other persons of rank; clothed in their various uniforms, and adorned with decorations. The purpose was twofold, i. e., to obtain the pope's influence with the Catholic members of the Reichstag, so as to secure the passage of the bill increasing the German army, and, also, for inducing the pope to favor the triple alliance, and to separate him from Republican France. Whether either of these purposes shall be accomplished or not, the imperial visit to the Vatican is significant of the fact that the pope is possessed, both directly and indirectly, of large political influence, even though no longer a temporal prince. Europe has to-day no more astute politician than Leo XIII., and he exerts all his influences steadily, and only too successfully, in securing larger privileges and power for the Catholic hierarchy.—California Christian Advocate, April, 1893. A Scotchman's wife besought him to pray that the life of their dying baby might be spared. True to his old instincts, the good man knelt down devoutly, and went out on the well-worn track, as he was wont to do in the prayer meeting at the church. Through and through the routine petitions he wandered along helplessly, until he reached, at last, the honored quotation, "Lord, remember thine ancient people, and turn again the captivity of Zion!" A mother's heart could hold its patience no longer. "Eh, man!" the woman broke forth impetuously, "you are all drawn out for the Jews, but it's our bairn that's adeein'." Then, clasping her hands, she cried: "Oh, help us, Lord, and give our darling back to us, if it be thy holy will; but if he is to be taken away from us, make us know thou wilt have him to thyself!" That wife knew what it was to pray a real prayer; and to the throne of grace she went, asking directly what she wanted.—Worker. The Devil in a Gentleman’s Guise
By P. S. Henson
THE devil does not walk abroad as he used to, with horns and hoofs and a forked tail, and a breath that smells of brimstone, but he comes in the guise of a gentleman, with eyeglasses on his nose, encyclopedias under his arms, and the learned lingo of philosophy on his lips. He does not squarely and impudently affirm that there is no God, but shakes his sapient head, and shrugs his shoulders, and says he doesn't know, and he rather suspects that nobody knows.—P. S. Henson, D.D. BE CHARITABLE.
By St. Nicholas
I STUDIED my tables over and over, and backward and forward, too,
But I couldn't remember six times nine, and I didn't know what to do,
Till sister told me to play with my doll, and not to bother my head.
"If you call her Fifty-four for a while, you'll learn it by heart," she said. So I took my favorite, Mary Ann (though I thought 'twas a dreadful shame
To give such a perfectly lovely child such a perfectly horrid name),
And I called my dear little "Fifty-four" a hundred times, till I knew
The answer to six times nine as well as the answer to two times two. Next day Elizabeth Wigglesworth, who always acts so proud,
Said, "Six times nine is fifty-two," and I nearly laughed aloud;
But I wished I hadn't, when the teacher said, "Now, Dorothy, tell, if you can."
For I thought of my doll, and—sakes alive—I answered, "Mary Ann"!