p. 67 | Review and Herald, Vol. 25, No. 9. (1/24/1865)

Review and Herald

Jan 24, 1865

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jan 24, 1865

Schism.

By R. F. Cottrell

BY ELD. R. F. COTTRELL.

THE Roman church, which claims the title of Catholic, has much to say in condemnation of schism and schismatics. With that church, schism, or a breach of unity, is a sin of great magnitude, and schismatics, heretics, factionists, those who separate themselves, are reckoned among the chief of sinners. All Protestants are condemned by her adherents as schismatics, as those who have separated themselves from the only true, apostolical church; and this is the reason why Catholics look upon Protestants with such utter abhorrence—they think them guilty of a great sin.

On the other hand, many have come to esteem it a very slight thing, a matter of indifference, to separate themselves from a body which professes to be the church of Jesus Christ, and uniting with another, making the same profession. All will admit that to leave a false church and unite with the true, instead of being a sin, would be praise-worthy. And since it is so difficult to find the true church, where all is division and discord, it is natural to come to the conclusion that there is but little difference, as to the claims of different sects to true Christianity, and consequently any one of them may be left at pleasure, and without incurring guilt in the slightest degree.

I am not a Roman Catholic; but the reason I am not, is because I do not believe that church to be the true apostolic church. Convince me that she is, and I dare not be a Protestant. But I find a great apostasy foretold in the prophecies of both the Old and the New Testament, and the Roman popedom came into being in the right time, place and manner, and developed the right characteristics, to fulfill the prophecy; and no other power—kingdom or popedom—ever has or ever can fulfill all the specified characteristics of the little horn of Dan. vii, the Man of sin of 2 Thess. ii, and the beast of Rev. xiii, 1-10. Now if Romanism has its foundation in apostasy or falling away from primitive Christianity, as the Scriptures abundantly testify, it was no sin, but a virtue, to secede from her communion. And as the early reformers were not free from the errors of the apostasy, and as the depraved human heart naturally leans to apostasy and not to purity, so that no sect of religionists can be reformed as a whole, it was no sin for those who continued the work of reformation, and were still progressing toward the light and purity of primitive Christianity, to leave the several Protestant churches who had become stereotyped in error, and thus increase the number of sects, if not the evil of division.

But in the first age of the Christian church, the apostles' days, when the church was united and pure, schism, heresy or secession was a grievous sin, as we may see by a reference to the Scriptures. Says an apostle, "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly, and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple." Rom. xvi, 17-18. Those who cause divisions are to be marked and avoided. They serve not the Lord, but themselves; and for this purpose, with fair speeches, they deceive all they can. The church were troubled with such persons in the days of the apostles, and it is well to heed the caution now, since it is possible that there may be such persons still in the world.

Paul had heard that there were divisions in the church at Corinth; and he condemns them for it as being carnal. He exhorts them thus: "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgment." 1 Cor. i, 10. Should a church appear, in these days of division and anarchy, living up to this exhortation of the apostle—thinking, speaking, and acting alike, it would be the greatest wonder of the age.

They would be, as the prophet says, "for signs and for wonders in Israel;" and many doubtless would say, "They are just like the ignorant Roman Catholics—they do just as their priests tell them." But would the Corinthians have become Roman Catholics by heeding the advice of the apostle? Would they have become blind slaves of an earthly priesthood? No, verily! Such unity would have been the brightest illustration of the Christian virtues—the highest recommendation, and the most convincing proof of the heavenly origin of our holy religion. "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me." Jno. xvii, 21. If perfect unity in the church would tend to convince the world of the truth, what is the tendency of division? Does a divided church testify for the truth, or against it? If for it, our Saviour used bad logic in the above text, but if against it, division is a great evil; and we may truly say, as we look at the present state of the church, "An enemy hath done this."

But for further proof that schism was considered a grievous sin by the apostles, we quote Paul's words to the elders of the church at Ephesus. "For I know this, that after my departing, shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men enter, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them." Acts, xx, 29, 30. Again, he says to Titus, "A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject; knowing that he that is such, is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself." Chap. iii, 10, 11.

The word rendered heretic, in this last quotation, means, according to Greenfield, "one who creates factions," and by some translators has been rendered, "a factionist." It is one who speaks "perverse things to draw away disciples" after him. If these agents of the Devil had never professed Christianity, the church would have remained one; but nothing short of the absolute power of God could keep them from professing religion; and He has permitted it, in order to prove his people. Says the apostle, "I hear that there be divisions [schisms] among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heretics [sects] among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you." 1 Cor. xi, 18, 19.

To divide the church of Christ was a sin, in the days of the apostles. When did it cease to be a sin? The answer must be, Never; that which was once a sin, is always a sin. There can be no excuse for separating from a church unless it be that it is not the church of Christ. If the Roman church was the church of Christ, the Protestants sinned in separating from her. If the Episcopalian church was the church of Christ, Methodists and all other dissenters from her, sinned in leaving her; and if the Methodist, the Presbyterian, the Baptist, or any other church that has become divided, is the church of Christ, then the numerous sects, which are off-shoots from these, were conceived in sin and born in iniquity. But if, on the other hand, these seceders have been real reformers, if their adherence to truth and righteousness, was the cause of their separation, then the churches they left needed reformation and were not, as bodies, the pure churches of Christ; and being deserted by many of the best, living members, were in a worse and more lifeless condition than before, if not wholly rejected of God for their corruptions, and unwillingness to reform.

Nothing can justify secession from a church but the fact of her apostasy; or in other words, that she is not what she professes to be—a Christian church. But, says the Catholic, have the gates of hell prevailed against the church? We answer, No, but the same prophetic word that assures us that the gates of hell should not prevail against the church, also assures us that there would be a great apostasy, or falling away, and that this would result in the development of the man of sin—a power usurping the place and power of God, and claiming, as the supreme head of the church, the right to give laws to the church. That word also assures us, that when the apostasy should prevail and bear rule, the true church, though not destroyed, should dwell in seclusion and obscurity—should remain in the wilderness. For centuries, apostasy has been prominent, while the true church has been in the back-ground and almost hidden from view. But the time was to come, when she should come forth from the wilderness, like the rising of the morning: first, "fair as the moon," then, "clear as the sun," and finally, "terrible as an army with banners."

The "reign of terror" closed with the dawn of the Reformation; and the church commenced her egress from the wilderness. But her progress has been retarded at every step by that same spirit of worldly conformity which had resulted in the first great apostasy. The veriest worldlings, those who had no part nor lot in the matter of true religion, would still make the profession; and not only so, but they must guide in matters of religion, and make articles of faith for the church. Kings and queens threw off the papal yoke to set up popery at home, and make themselves popes over their own dominions. And thus the church has been crippled and creed-bound; still held from advancement in reformation, by worldly influences, and in illicit intercourse with the "kings of the earth."

But will the Reformation prove a failure? Will not the church advance from the fairness of the moon, to the clearness of the sun? Will she not again appear, as in primitive days, "clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet?" Will she not yet "come into unity of faith?" She will; and this work will be effected by the proclamation of the closing messages of probation, prophesied of in Rev. xiv, 6-12. This work is now being moved forward by the power of the Spirit of God, and in perfect harmony with the word of prophecy. This being the case, let factionists take warning. Fighting against God is no small sin. To be engaged in this work when probation shall close, will be a fatal mistake.

To secede from apostate churches and human creeds has been, and is, no sin; but to attempt to draw away disciples from the work of the Lord, is as great a sin now as ever it was. Still men with hearts unsubdued by grace, will ostensibly embrace the truth. But soon their factious propensities crop out, and the disposition is manifest either to rule or ruin; and being baf-fled in their ambition, and disappointed of their hopes, they become the bitterest opposers of the work of God. And there are others of apparently mild and peaceable disposition, seemingly a very good sort of people, who nevertheless, are so void of judgment and of a just sense of their responsibility, that they appear to think it a very light matter to embrace the truth, or to forsake it. At one time they labor to promote the cause, at another, to disparage it. For awhile they seem to be traveling on, heart and hand, with believers in the work of God, but an adverse wind arises, perhaps a party starts off in opposition and suddenly they appear in their company; not because they have any grievous complaint against the principles of the cause, nor against their brethren, but as if they had no sense of responsibility, and thought it a thing of indifference whether they labored for, or against the truth. Perhaps I cannot illustrate my meaning better than by giving a quotation from one of this class, published in 1856, in the Messenger and Advocate, a short-lived paper gotten up by a faction from the cause of truth. Our good friend expressed himself as follows: "I am glad to hear that there are in the West, some of the 'remnant' who are striving to keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. I also love Bro. White of the Review, and all in every place, who delight in the law of God, and who are looking for his blessed Son from Heaven. I am glad also to see the Messenger and Advocate, started as I hope, on a more liberal principle than the Review." Now the Messenger is no more, and they that started and sustained it are no more; many of them are now the bitterest enemies of that "law of God" which our friend seemed so to delight in. But does he feel that he has made shipwreck? Does he feel that God will hold him accountable for thus blindly and heedlessly giving his influence with the enemies of the cause of truth? I fear not. I fear that should another similar craft appear, bound to the bottom, he would think it no harm to jump on board for another short ride; and perhaps would have "another angel's message" to hold up in opposition to the work of God.

Oh that men felt their responsibility! felt that God will bring them into judgment, for the influence they exert! The cause in which we are engaged is the cause of God, or it is not. If not, why dabble with it? Why not display a bold front against it? If it is, why not heartily embrace it, and give your whole influence in its favor? The Lord would have you one thing or the other—"either cold or hot." It will not do to trifle with the word and work of God. Those who have sinned in this way, will have to retrace their steps, take up the stumbling-blocks, and counteract, as far as possible, the wrong influence they have exerted, if they would be found of Christ in peace at his coming.

In fulfillment of the third message of Rev. xiv, the church, called in prophecy the remnant of the seed of the woman, is being developed. It is folly and infidelity to deny it, for the word of God promised it, and we behold the fulfillment. The three advent messages have been announced in the order of the prophecy which is the promise of God, and the people are appearing, which are described as keeping "the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus." The dragon spirit is being aroused against them, not only because they keep the commandments of God, but because they "have the testimony of Jesus Christ," which is "the spirit of prophecy." When the evidences of this, are fairly presented to the mind, it is as I said, infidelity to deny it. "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God;" and a person may just as well say so as to deny God's providence in fulfilling his word, that is, to assert, when God's word of promise is fulfilled, that he has not done it. But if the Lord is doing this work, he is doing a special work, as much as when he delivered Israel from Egyptian bondage; and it must be evident to all, that those who oppose this work must fall, and that the professed friends of truth who are found in rebellion must perish; even as Dathan and Abiram and all those secessionists whose carcasses fell in the wilderness. I am not speaking from passion, but from sober reason, as every truly enlightened conscience must testify.

Schism, or secession from the church, in the primitive days of Christianity, was a sin; because God's word and Spirit were her guide—she kept the commandments of God and had the testimony of Jesus Christ. Since the apostasy, and the entrance of the church into the wilderness, tradition has usurped the place of the word, and human creeds, the place of the Spirit; and it has been a virtue, to secede from these usurpers. But now the church has so far advanced from her wilderness seclusion, that the word and the Spirit—the commandments and the testimony—have been restored to their legitimate place in the church, and tradition and creeds are being rejected as worthless—as human and not divine. We lose nothing by rejecting these. The Lord gives us, in the place of tradition, his immutable word, and in the place of creeds, his unerring Spirit. To secede from the church that is being guided by these, is rebellion against God. Terrible is the mission of the third angel's message. It is separating the wheat from the tares. Let the humble and believing receive the truth, let scoffers and infidels stand aloof. But let the factious and hypocritical take their hands off, and not meddle with the work of God. Judgment against an evil work is not always speedily executed; but a few cases are left on record as examples and warnings. There may be no more Dathans and Abirams swallowed up of earthquakes, before the mighty earthquake when God shall utter his voice; and no Ananiases and Sapphiras struck dead for lying against the Holy Spirit, till the great day of His wrath shall come. But the day of a just retribution will come.

"What a vindictive spirit?" do I hear. I feel no desire to execute that vengeance which belongs to God alone, nor to "Deal damnation round the land, On each I judge his foe."

I speak the words of truth and soberness, and warn the reader of the wrath to come, in order that he may escape. I am not writing for the benefit of incorrigible factionists—those that are so far gone in rebellion against God and his work, that they are past cure. I write to warn you, my dear friend, who are in danger of being led into temptation and rebellion. You who see God's present work, and are yet so undecided in the truth. You who do not feel your responsibility—who feel at liberty to identify yourself with God's work, or with the opposition, as caprice may dictate. You who through the influence of these times, when the right of self-government in the State, and the right of conscience in the church, have degenerated into secession and anarchy—when the noble principle of protest against corruption and usurpation has been superseded by a reckless and fanatical come-outism which knows no divine restraint, are in danger of throwing off responsibility, treating the word of God with contempt or indifference, and despising and blaspheming the work of the Holy Spirit. Consider well what you are doing, before you venture to range yourself in the ranks of the enemies of the truth of God and his present work. If God is preparing his people for translation, his work is one—he is not the author of confusion. He has chosen his instrumentality and will stand by it to the last. The world united cannot stop the car of truth, reverse the engine, or throw it off the track. Individuals or squads may sever themselves from the work of God, but the work moves on; no device against it can prosper.

If you have any faith in the word of prophecy, if you are satisfied that we are in the last days, you must know that it is time for the advent messages to be proclaimed; and, witnessing their proclamation, you may know that the hand of God is moving the work. Then unite heartily in the work, and do not stop to modify it and correct its errors, because it does not harmonize with all your preconceived opinions. But if you have no faith in God's word and providence, consistency would require that you should show a clean front against it. It is best to choose one side or the other; and not feign to believe God's word, and spend all your time and energy in mending his work.

God lives and reigns. He is sure to fulfill all his word; and he is excellent in working. Let none presume to correct his errors and to mend his work. The Jews tried this at the first advent, and fell. While the prophecies were being interpreted by their fulfillment, they would not admit it—they did not believe. May God save the reader and the writer from following their example of unbelief.

Crucified.

O SAD, reproachful Face, How can I look and live? O pierced Hands outstretched to save! O Voice that pleads, "Forgive!"

"Forgive!" though crowned with thorns, And mocked with many a jeer; "Forgive?" though tortured by the nails, And wounded by the spear!

O crimson tide of love, Outgushing from His side, Flow down, and wash the guilty earth, Where He is still denied!

In penitence my soul Takes up that cry, "Forgive!" Flow down, and wash away my sins, That I may look and live!

The Meek of the Earth.

By C. A. Osgood

BRO. WHITE: As the "gospel is good tidings to the meek," as very precious promises are made to the meek in the book of God, and as a great measure of meekness is necessary for us in order to be prepared for "the time of trouble" that is but a little way before us, that we "may be hid in the day of the Lord's anger;" I am induced to make some extracts from an old work entitled, "A discourse on meekness and quietness of spirit," by Matthew Henry.

I write these extracts for publication in the Review, if you think proper.

C. A. OSGOOD.

The Nature of Meekness.

Meekness is easiness of spirit; not a sinful easiness to be debauched, as Ephraim's, who willingly walked after the commandment of the idolatrous princes; nor a simple easiness to be imposed upon and deceived, as Rehoboam's, who, when he was forty years old, is said to have been young and tender-hearted; but a gracious easiness to be wrought upon by that which is good; as theirs whose heart of stone is taken away, and to whom a heart of flesh is given. Meekness accommodates the soul to every occurrence, and so makes a man easy to himself, and all about him. The Latins call a meek man, mansuetus, which alludes to the taming and reclaiming of creatures wild by nature, and bringing them to be tractable and familiar. Man untamed is like the wild ass, used to the wilderness, or the swift dromedary traversing her ways. But the grace of meekness, when that gets dominion in the soul, alters the temper of it, submits it to management; enmities are laid aside, and now there is no disposition to hurt or destroy.

Meekness may be considered with respect both to God and to our fellow men; it belongs to both tables of the law, and attends upon the first great commandment, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God; as well as the second, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself; though its especial reference is to the latter.

I. There is meekness toward God, and it is the easy

and quiet submission of the soul to his whole will, according as he is pleased to make it known, whether by his word or by his providence.

1. It is the silent submission of the soul to the word of God; the understanding bowed to every divine truth, and the will to every divine precept; and both without murmuring or disputing. The word is then an "engrafted word," when it is received with meekness, that is, with a sincere willingness to be taught, and desire to learn. Meekness is that grace which cleaves the stock, and holds it open, that the word, as the shoot, may be grafted in; it breaks up the fallow ground, and makes it fit to receive the seed; brings down the high thoughts, and lays the soul like white paper under God's pen. When the day-spring takes hold of the ends of the earth, it is said to be turned as clay to the seal. Job xxxviii, 14. Meekness does, in like manner, dispose the soul to admit the rays of divine light, which before it rebelled against; it opens the heart as Lydia's was opened, and sets us down with Mary at the feet of Christ, the learner's place and posture.

The promise of teaching is made to the meek, because they are disposed to learn; "The meek will he teach his way." The word of God is gospel indeed, "good tidings to the meek;" they will entertain it, and bid it welcome. The "poor in spirit" are blessed by the gospel; and wisdom's alms are given to those who with meekness wait daily at her gates, and, like beggars, wait at the posts of her doors. The language of this meekness is that of the child Samuel, "Speak, Lord, for thy servant heareth," and that of Joshua, who, when commander of the hosts of Israel, and bidding defiance to their enemies, yet upon an intimation of a message from Heaven, thus submits himself to it, "What saith my Lord to his servant?" and that of Paul (and it was the first breath of the new man), "Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?" and that of Cornelius, "Now are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God;" and that of the good man I have read of, who, when he was going to hear the word used to say, "Now let the word of the Lord come; and if I had six hundred necks, I would bow them all to the authority of it."

Meekness softens the wax, that it may receive the impression of the seal, whether it be for doctrine or reproof, for correction or instruction in righteousness. It opens the ear to discipline, silences objections against the word, and suppresses the risings of the carnal mind against it; consenting to the law that it is good, and esteeming all precepts concerning all things to be right, even when they give the greatest check to flesh and blood.

II. It is the silent submission of the soul to the providence of God, for this also is the will of God concerning us.

1st. When the events of Providence are grievous and afflictive, displeasing to sense and crossing our secular interests, meekness not only quiets us under them, but reconciles us to them; and enables us not only to bear, but to receive evil as well as good at the hand of the Lord, which is the excellent frame that Job argues himself into: it is to kiss the rod, and even to accept the punishment of our iniquity, taking all in good part that God does; not daring to strive with our Maker, nor daring to prescribe to him, but being dumb, and not opening the mouth, because God does it. How meek was Aaron under the severe dispensation which took away his sons with a particular mark of divine wrath! He "held his peace;" God was sanctified, and therefore Aaron was satisfied, and had not a word to say against it. The language of meekness is that of Eli, "It is the Lord;" and that of David to the same purport, "Here am I, let him do to me as seemeth good to him." Not only he can do what he will, thus subscribing to his power; for who can stay his hand? or he may do what he will, subscribing to his sovereignty; or he will do what he will, subscribing to his unchangeableness; but let him do what he will, subscribing to his wisdom and goodness; as Hezekiah, "Good is the word of the Lord which thou hast spoken." Let him do what he will, for he will do what is best; and therefore, if God should refer the matter to me, says the meek and quiet soul, being well assured that he knows what is best for me better than I do for myself, I would refer it to him again.

2nd. When the methods of Providence are dark and intricate, and we are quite at a loss what God is about to do with us—his way is in the sea, and his path in the great waters, and his footsteps are not known, clouds and darkness are round about him—a meek and quiet spirit acquiesces in an assurance that all things shall work together for good to us if we love God, though we cannot apprehend how or which way. It teaches us to follow God with an implicit faith, as Abraham did when he went out not knowing whether he went, but knowing very well whom he followed. It quiets us with this, that though what he doeth we know not now, we shall know hereafter. When poor Job was brought to that dismal plunge, that he could no way trace the footsteps of Divine Providence, but was almost lost in the labyrinth, how quietly does he sit down with this thought, "But he knows the way that I take; when he hath tried me I shall come forth as gold."

The Lord's Day.

By Wm. S. Foote

READER, you possibly believe that the "Lord's day" is the Sabbath now; so do we; but do we understand what is meant by the Lord's day in Rev. i, 10? "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day." You will agree with us that the Sabbath was instituted at creation, and in commemoration of that event. I think you will come to that conclusion after reading Gen. ii, 3. "God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made."

I imagine that I hear you say that you believe that the first day of the week is the Sabbath or Lord's day, but upon what you base such an opinion, I cannot conceive. I am sure that you cannot find anything in the Bible to justify you in such a belief.

We believe that the seventh-day Sabbath is the Lord's day, because we are told in Ex. xx, "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God;" and in Mark ii, 27, 28, "The Sabbath was made for man,—therefore the Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath." How is he Lord of the Sabbath? The apostle John tells us that the Word (or Christ) was in the beginning with God," and that "all things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." Of course he made the Sabbath, as that certainly is among the all things; and it is his day, his property; yes the Lord's day, until he gives up his claim to it. Has he ever done so?

Why do you oppose the idea of "remembering the Sabbath day to keep it holy?" Is it not because it is inconvenient for you to do so? and also because it is very unpopular? Is it because "the carnal mind is enmity against God, not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be?"

Perhaps it would be too self-denying, and would expose you to the contempt and ridicule of your neighbors. They would point the finger of scorn, and call you a Jew, a fanatic, and an infidel, and you would be obliged to "face a frowning world" and a frowning church too. Is it because you do not love God enough to keep his commandments? and because the path of obedience is too self-denying? Can you flatter yourself that you are in the possession of justifying faith, of saving faith, while living in disobedience to the law of God, which is called "holy just and good." O friend, come away from the crowd, face the storm from Satan manfully; the Lord of the Sabbath is near at hand, even at the door; yes, he who has said, through his holy apostle "This is the love of God, that ye keep his commandments." May we keep them and the faith of Jesus too.

Wm. S. Foote.

Pendleton, Ohio.

The First Fanatic.

[THE following is clipped from the Continental Monthly ; and as it applies very appropriately to popular opinion upon our work, I send it for publication, if deemed worthy. E. G. RUST. Chicago, Ills.]

When Noah hewed the timber Wherewith to build the ark, Outside the woods one shouted— "That wild fanatic!—hark!"

And when he drew the beams And laid them on the plain, One said, "He has no balance, He surely is insane."

And when he raised the frame, One clear sunshiny day, "Poor fool of one idea," A smiling man did say.

When he foretold the flood, And stood repentance teaching, They sneered "You radical, We'll have no ultra preaching."

And when the beasts and birds Came to the ark one morn, They shouted, "Old enthusiast!" And laughed with ringing scorn.

When he and his went in, They gazed and said "Erratic! A pleasant voyage to you, Noah, You canting, queer fanatic."

But when in floods that came, They found a grave aquatic; They cried "alas! it's we, not he, Have been the poor fanatic."

Horror of Debt.

On the first rule of the art of managing money, all preceptors must be agreed. It is told in three words—Horror of debt. Nurse, cherish, never cavil away the wholesome horror of Debt. Personal liberty is the paramount essential to human dignity and human happiness. Man hazards the condition, and loses the virtues of a freeman, in proportion as he accustoms his thoughts to view without anguish and shame his lapse into the bondage of debtor. Debt is to man what the serpent is to the bird; its eye fascinates, its breath poisons, its coil crushes sinew and bone, its jaw is the pitiless grave. If you mock my illustration, if you sneer at the truth it embodies, give yourself no farther trouble to learn how to manage your money: Consider yourself doomed; pass on your way with a jaunty step; the path is facile. But if, while I write, your heart, true to the instinct of manhood, responds to my words—if you say, 'Agreed; that which you call the first rule for the management of money, I hold yet more imperative as the necessity to freedom and the life-spring of probity'—then advance on your way assured that wherever it winds it must ascend. You see but the temple of Honor; close behind it is the temple of Fortune.—Caxtoniana.

AN UNHEALTHY HOUSE.

A dark house is always an unhealthy house, always an ill-aired house, always a dirty house. Want of light stops growth, and promotes scrofula, rickets, etc., among children. People lose their health in a dark house, and if they get ill, they can not get well again in it. Three, out of many negligences and ignorance in managing the health of houses generally, I will here mention as specimens. First, that the female head in charge of any building, does not think it necessary to visit every hole and corner of it every day. Second, that it is not considered essential to air, to sun, and clean rooms while uninhabited. Third, that one window is considered enough to air a room.—Sel.

A License at the Bar of God.

"Yes," said the Rev. John Pierpont, "you have a license—and that is your plea. Well, my friend, if that is your plea, I adjure you to keep it; look it amongst your choicest jewels; guard it as the apple of your eye; and when you die, and are laid in your coffin, be sure that this precious document is placed within your cold and clammy fingers, so that when you are called upon to confront the souls of your victims before God, you may be ready to file in your plea of justification, and boldly to lay down your license on the bar of the Judge. Yes, my friend, keep it—you will then want your license, signed by the county commissioners and endorsed by the selectmen!

A Marvelous Discovery.

By Editor

As the reader is aware from what has already appeared in the Review, there is an unusual stir in the ranks of the opposition on the subject of the Sabbath. To be continually dwelling upon the false positions of our opponents is not pleasant; but it may be nevertheless profitable; for every exhibition of their weakness, is an addition of so much strength to our cause. We shall therefore endeavor to keep the reader posted in relation to what is going on in this direction.

Some of the many attacks that have been made on the Sabbath, have astonished us by their bold and unwarrantable assumptions; others have appeared to deserve only pity or contempt. As an article calculated to excite all three of these emotions, we give the following from A. N. Seymour as found in the Voice of the West, of Jan. 3, 1865. Under the heading of "Seventh-Day Sabbath-Keepers in a tight place," he says:

"Some few years since, this people commenced keeping their Sabbath at six o'clock. But a dispute arose among them, whether they should commence the Sabbath at six o'clock, or sundown time. After considerable controversy on the question, Mrs. E. G. White had a vision on the matter and she decided that sundown time was God's appointment for the church to lay by all worldly interests and keep holy the seventh-day Sabbath or the twenty-four hours that God sanctified and blessed. This vision settled the dispute; and ever since, Sabbath-keepers have observed sundown time. I now wish to present a thought which, if I do not entirely misapprehend it, completely overthrows their church and hobby of Sabbath-keeping, and stamps indetibly the mark of the beast upon this class, providing that, observing the first day constitutes this mark; for they are found to observe parts of this day, to say the least.

"A short time since, I requested Mr. Paine, a graduate of Hillsdale College, to give me the distance between the following places, and the difference of time also. He presented me with the following table.

From London to N. York, 4935 miles.	N. Lat.	W. L.
" " " San Francisco, 8549 m.	"	"
" " " Jerusalem, 2433 m.	"	E. L.
" " " Pekin, 8201 m.	"	"

Difference of time between London and N. York, 4 h. and 44 m. earlier. " " " and San Francisco, 8 h. 12 m. earlier. " " " Jerusalem, 2 h. 20 m. later. " " " Pekin, 7 h. 52 m. "

"Church time Sunday Dec. 4, 1864, in the following places: Pekin, 2 o'clock 30 m. P. M. Sunday. Jerusalem, 4 " 56 m. A. M. Sunday. London, 4 " 02 m. A. M. Sunday. N. York, 11 " 18 m. P. M. Saturday. San Francisco, 3 o'clock 6 m. P. M. Saturday.

"Now then observing sundown time, who can fail to see that it is impossible for all Christians to observe the seventh-day Sabbath, located as they are throughout the world. There is a constant variation of sun setting all around the earth to its inhabitants, so that there is a continual difference of time as regards the commencement of that which some regard holy time. So that while some try imperfectly to observe the Sabbath, others, on the opposite side of the globe are locked in profound slumber, and vise [vice] versa. The best that the Christian world can do is to observe the seventh part of the time, as it comes to them. But this forever destroys seventh-day Sabbath interests.

"On this ground it may be asked how could the Sabbath then ever be observed by God's people in a past dispensation? I answer, God called his people out of Egypt into the land of Canaan, and there commanded them to keep the Sabbath; and there they could and did keep it; and God never enjoined Sabbath keeping upon any nation outside of that land; and when the gospel dispensation was introduced and its messengers commanded to go into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature, no command flows from their inspired lips rendering obligatory the fourth precept of the Decalogue or the keeping any other specified day.

"Will the Crisis, Review & Herald please copy?"

So it seems, A. N. S. has just discovered that time differs east and west. Since the merited castigation given him by J. M. Aldrich in his reply to his 1876 Questions, this man has been comparatively quiet. But having at length discovered "a thought" in the shape of an objection to the Sabbath, which is as old almost as the Sabbath itself, and has been answered as often as brought up, he is very jubilant over it as a new and marvelous discovery, and thinks now he has the whole fraternity in a "tight place." We will not spend time in answering this oft repeated quibble. For any reader of the Review and our works on the Sabbath, it is unnecessary. And as for the writer, if this objection is a specimen of the rapidity with which he receives ideas, it would be about ten years, should time continue, before he would come to a full comprehension of it should we answer it. We will just remind the reader, however, that those who bring up the difference of time east and west as an objection to the Sabbath, have never attempted to explain how Paul could keep the Sabbath at Corinth, as recorded in the Acts, where it would commence nearly an hour later than at Jerusalem. We think they had better do this before they say anything more about this objection.

But it is not on account of the writer, by any means that we notice the above article: for it has never been our lot to meet a person who would attach to such puerile efforts such mighty importance. But perhaps nothing better could be expected from a man who has to apply to a graduate of college to tell him that the sun does not shine all over the earth at one and the same moment. What astonishes us in this case is that the Voice should consent to publish such articles. Eld. Himes has frankly avowed himself as opposed to the no-Sabbath side of this controversy. Yet here is an ultra no-Sabbath article admitted into his paper. The statement about the visions is the same that was made by Eld. Himes in the Voice sometime since (from which A. N. S. probably got his information) and which we expressly corrected in Review Vol. xxiv, No. 14. Yet here the same statement appears again without comment or qualification. Eld. H. found it necessary in 1848, to open in the paper he was then publishing a "Liar's Department" to correct the misstatements of his opponents. We may yet find it necessary to do the same thing.

Continue reading: J. W