Your ShelfYour Projects

The Weekly Signs

2%

Pacific Press Publishing Association · Mountain View, California · Jan 6, 1909

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 36, No. 1.

Read the full edition

The Weekly Signs.

By Editor

What They Are Saying About It.

In the middle of last year, amid conflicting opinions and advice, it was thought a safe compromise had been reached in the publishing of a monthly edition of the weekly, and in cutting down the number which followed the monthly edition to one-half size. But it, like many other things earthly, was altogether unsatisfactory all around; and after a long study and earnest prayer, we decided to separate the two journals—publish the monthly independent and restore the weekly to its original size.
Among the many expressions which have come from the great field—from union conference presidents of the United States, many conference presidents, ministers and laymen,—we take the following sentences:
“Cutting down the SIGNS OF THE TIMES would be a disappointment at any time. I am glad that you have decided to place it back where it was.”
“I am glad you have decided to make this change and I believe that the future will reveal the wisdom of it.”
“We can not afford to take any backward step, and the restoration of the SIGNS OF THE TIMES to its original size is a step in the right direction.”
“I want to tell you that I feel good to know that our good old missionary paper is to come back to its former page and size.”
“We need the original weekly SIGNS OF THE TIMES as a pioneer paper. We must enlarge, if anything—the times demand it.”
“In regard to restoring the SIGNS OF THE TIMES to its old form, I am very much pleased at this proposition.”
“I wish to say that it is the best news you have sent us for many a day.”
“The SIGNS OF THE TIMES was never a disappointment to me until the changes which you mention, were made during the past year.”
“I am heartily glad that you are to continue the weekly as of old. It will seem like the resurrection from the dead, of an old friend.”
“I am very glad indeed for the monthly gotten out as it is, but with all this, give me back the SIGNS OF THE TIMES restored to its old form—the number of pages—and we will all be rejoiced over here.”
“Surely the Lord has been guiding you in wisdom as you determine to restore the SIGNS OF THE TIMES weekly to its old form.”
“I am more than pleased to know that you are going back to the old size of paper.”
“I think we are all glad to know that we are again to meet our old friend whom we supposed had gone, never to return.”
“Will say that I am in harmony with you.”
“To my mind you have made no change to equal the SIGNS OF THE TIMES as it was.”
“I am indeed glad that the SIGNS OF THE TIMES is to be restored to its original size and I trust, to its former usefulness.”
“When I read ‘For 1909’ I said, ‘Thank God, the old SIGNS OF THE TIMES is going to be restored.’”
“Concerning the weekly SIGNS OF THE TIMES, would say that I am glad to hear that it is coming back to its original size, strength, and beauty. I am sure that it will be appreciated more than ever if it returns to its former self.”
“I believe you have hit on a better plan for the greater success of the SIGNS OF THE TIMES than anything I have seen yet.”
“I would briefly say that I am pleased to know that the SIGNS OF THE TIMES is to be placed on a settled basis, and more like that which we used to receive.”
“I believe the conclusion to which you have come regarding the issuing of the usual size weekly SIGNS OF THE TIMES, together with the monthly magazine, is wise. I know we will appreciate the SIGNS OF THE TIMES in its old form.”
“I am very glad you have decided to increase the weekly to a 16-page paper, and I indorse all you say in your letter.”
“I am truly glad you are planning to place the weekly issue back to its former size and page.”
“Brevity is the proper thing for all subjects; but brevity should never be at the expense of clearness.”
“I am glad you decided to restore it back as it was, as there is nothing so real homelike as the SIGNS OF THE TIMES we read the first year that we were living the truth. Its weekly visits furnished the food that was just fitted for our new-found needs.”
“The SIGNS OF THE TIMES was born into the Advent family at the right time and has been at its work ever since, and I believe is to continue until probation closes.”
“I believe all our people will be glad to hear of the change.”
“Am very glad to know of your final decision to issue the SIGNS OF THE TIMES in its original and proper form and size.”
“Your letter was read with sincere delight. We will welcome with open arms the change back to the old form and standing.”
“I think we need the original weekly SIGNS OF THE TIMES as a pioneer paper. We as workers, churches, and conferences can not afford to be without this most excellent paper as an advance guard in our work.”
“To make the paper smaller in these last days of the conflict, is to say we will retreat in our work.”
“I agree with you that the SIGNS OF THE TIMES ought to be published weekly, and I welcome it back again to its full size.”
“I am very glad it has been decided to bring the SIGNS OF THE TIMES back as it used to be. It will seem good to get the paper that we used to get.”
“When I read your letter, I just said right out loud, ‘Good.’ Now you will have space for more subjects and consideration of themes that ought not to be condensed into shriveled proportions. It is true I will not find time to read it all, but I can skim it and walk away with the cream, and the more milk, the more cream, you know.”
“I must say that my heart was made glad when I read that the SIGNS OF THE TIMES would again be sent out in its original form.”
“I believe your views concerning the change of the paper to be correct. I have always looked upon the SIGNS OF THE TIMES as a great missionary sheet—well edited and admirably gotten up.”
“I think, all things considered, that I can heartily approve of your plan to return to the SIGNS OF THE TIMES as it was before the change.”
“I am glad to know the SIGNS OF THE TIMES is to return soon to the old form; to simply say I am glad is not emphatic enough. I am very glad.” (This from a Methodist scientist outside, whose name is known in scientific circles around the world.)
“I am much pleased to learn that the dear SIGNS OF THE TIMES is to come back again, or in other words, to recover from its sad fall.”
“I am glad to hear that the weekly SIGNS OF THE TIMES is to be built up again.”
Now these are sample expressions of many other letters which we have received. They have generally come in response to a letter stating that the SIGNS OF THE TIMES was to be restored. Some of them in response to the announcement made in a former paper. They come from every union conference president in the United States and Canada; they come from conference presidents, from the Atlantic to the Pacific; and from the far regions of the North to the Gulf, and they are still coming. They come from ministers all over the field, old and young. They come from college professors, from men working in foreign tongues, throughout the great South, the Atlantic States, the middle West. There is no section of the country which is not well represented in these extracts which we quote. All are in favor of the monthly. All are warmly in favor of the restoration of the weekly to its former size. We say, all. There have been just two letters which expressed doubt, but with no feeling of dissent. There has been only one in opposition.It cheers our hearts to know that there is but one letter of this kind which has come to the editorial rooms. It serves to make the others stand out all the clearer.
We wish to thank our brethren out in the great field for their words of sympathy and courage, and heartfelt appreciation. We wish we had space to quote all their letters, but this we could not do, nor would they wish it. The paper is given up to other purposes than that; but we sincerely pray and confidently hope that their prayers and good wishes may be answered in making the SIGNS OF THE TIMES a better exponent of the great truths of the last threefold message than ever before in its experience.