TWO MEALS A DAY by Henry F. Phelps

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jul 9, 1867

TWO MEALS A DAY.

By Henry F. Phelps

I HAVE for some time felt as though I would like to say a few words upon this branch of the Health Reform, and also give my experience in the matter. There is much prejudice against this, as well as other parts of the Reform, but honest people, those who are not such slaves to a perverted appetite, as to be unable to see anything in a clearer light, only need to be enlightened, to lose this prejudice, and be induced to take hold of these reforms, although unpopular, and live them out in such a way as to be an honor to the cause.

I am convinced that a few testimonies from those who have tried it, would have a great influence in inducing others to try it also. And after trying it faithfully, few would be willing to return to the old style again. If they should, it would merely happen to them according to the true proverb.

It is sneeringly said of us, that it is because we are tight, stingy &c.; but any individual has only to try the system a little, to put this argument—if indeed it may be called such,—forever out of their reach. I am satisfied that it is no saving of food to eat but two meals a day; for a person always has an appetite for each meal, and can eat it with a good relish; which is not always the case with those who eat three. It is a well known fact, that if man were to work continually, with scarcely any relaxation, his system would soon give way; disease or perhaps death would be the result. Just so it is with the stomach. By partaking of three meals a day, breakfasting at an early hour, and generally eating supper after the day’s work is completed, the stomach is crowded to overlabor, and as digestion goes on but slowly during sleep, it furnishes plenty of work for the stomach the most of the night, so that it gets but little rest.

This is the principal cause of so much poor appetite for the morning meal, and also the cause of so many restless and weary nights, disturbed by such frightful dreams; and we might say, and that truly, that it is the cause of a great many of those diseases about which we hear so many complaints. Were we to search the Bible for examples in this matter, we should find no example for three meals, breakfast never being named, only dinner and supper. We are informed by history that the Jews were in the habit of eating but two meals; the supper, which was the heaviest meal, was usually taken about noon, or sometimes after the heat of the day was passed; but in either case we see it must have been several hours before retiring to rest. This might be an objection to some, lest they should be called “Jews.” Well, what if we are called Jews? that does not make us so. And if the Jews were more physiological than we are, surely we should not be loath to reform, even though we might follow some of their customs.

But I was going to give my experience in regard to this two-meal-a-day arrangement. In the early part of the winter of 1865–6, (this I think is the best season of the year to begin with such a change,) I began to live upon two meals a day, resolved, if possible, to keep it up through the long days of summer. I found it possible, and have kept it up to this time, and have experienced no bad result. On the contrary, I think I am benefited by it. But if no other benefit could be derived from it, I should feel amply paid by seeing my companion find more time for reading and rest, and not making herself a perpetual slave to our appetites. This I take to be a great item. My labor has been hard work most of the time. I did, once in a while vary from the rule, and yield to a feeling which I concluded was a call for food, and take a bite at night, but always to my discomfort through the night, feeling restless, and being disturbed by dreams. This convinced me that this feeling was not a call for food but for rest, for by resting it would soon pass away, and my sleep would be quiet and sweet. But it may be thought strange by some, that one would be more disturbed by an occasional third meal, than by its continued use. To this I would say, it is because as we become obedient to the laws of our being, nature is more sensitive, and resents those insults which we offer much quicker than when we continually abuse her laws. Truly.

“Nature as a mistress, is gentle and holy.”

I cannot close without first giving my advice to all my brethren, that if they love their wives as we are commanded to do, they as soon as possible adopt the “Two-meals-a-day system;” for as the poet says: “This three meals a day is the curse of their lives.”

HENRY F. PHELPS.

Pine Island, Minn.